Gas Exports to the Countries of the European Union and the Asia-Pacific Region
This paper will examine the current situation as related to the global trade of natural gas and will draw some conclusions on how current developments will likely influence future trade and investment patterns. It will start by considering the increased influence of developing countries on energy markets and will continue by providing a detailed analysis of possible integration of energy markets, first within the European Union and then within the Asia Pacific region. It will continue with an analysis of gas production trends in Eurasia and the Middle East, two regions that are well-positioned to compete in both the European and Asia Pacific energy markets, before considering the implications for the Russian Federation, Qatar, and Turkmenistan. This contribution will then draw some conclusions based upon the topics discussed. This is an advance copy of an article that will be published as Rimma Subhankulova and Richard Wheeler, “Gas Exports to the Countries of the European Union and the Asia-Pacific Region,” The Journal of Energy and Development, volume 40, number 1 (autumn 2014, copyright 2015).
On October 12–13, 2012 the Second Asia-Pacific Forum was held in Moscow, organized by the Russian International Affairs Council and the Russian APEC Study Center in partnership with the International Affairsmagazine. Representatives from government agencies, Russia’s expert and business communities, the United States, China, Japan, Korea, Thailand, and the Philippines attended this event. The forum included plenary sessions and a series of panel discussions dealing with specific areas of Russia’s cooperation with Asia-Pacific countries, ranging from nuclear power to cooperation on information technologies.
The Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) hereby extends its gratitude to all participants in the Second Asia-Pacific Forum. This report could hardly have been prepared without a significant input made by each Forum participant in summing up Russia’s APEC presidency and identifying ways to deepen Russia’s integration into the Asia-Pacifi.
This report presents the key conclusions and proposals advanced by forum participants for public debate. RIAC plans to continue studying Asia-Pacific issues from the vantage point of implementing Russia’s strategic interests in this region, and is hopeful that the debate will continue
The author investigates the energy sector of economy of Russia, the peculiarities of the sector, its problems and their solutions.
In 2012, Russia assumes the Chairmanship of APEC, and is keen to build on its memberships of both the East Asia Summit (EAS) and the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). Russia is geographically and historically part of Asia and the Asia Pacific, and has been a dialogue partner of ASEAN since 1996. Still, the obstacles of distance and languages have led ASEAN member states and Russia to know and interact little between both sides. As growth poles in the world economy, there is much benefit in greater interaction between their rich economies. To commemorate the 15th Anniversary of the Russia-ASEAN dialogue partnership in 2011, the ASEAN Studies Centre at ISEAS and its counterpart from MGIMO-University, Moscow co-organized a two-day conference that year, in which papers were presented offering perspectives from Russia and the ten ASEAN member states. Representatives from academia, and the public and private sectors offered insights on topics including geopolitics, bilateral relations, business and economics, and culture and education. This is a timely book that affords the reader insights into where ASEAN-Russia relations currently stand and suggests how they can improve and move forward.
This book examines the history of reforms and major state interventions affecting Russian agriculture: the abolition of serfdom in 1861, the Stolypin reforms, the New Economic Policy (NEP), the collectivization, the Khrushchev reforms, and finally the farm enterprise privatization in the early 1990s. It shows a pattern emerging from a political imperative in imperial, Soviet, and post-Soviet regimes, and it describes how these reforms were justified in the name of the national interest during severe crises – rapid inflation, military defeat, mass strikes, rural unrest, and/or political turmoil. It looks at the consequences of adversity in the economic environment for rural behavior after reform and at longrun trends. It has chapters on property rights, rural organization, and technological change. It provides a new database for measuring agricultural productivity from 1861 to 1913 and updates these estimates to the present. This book is a study of the policies aimed at reorganizing rural production and of their effectiveness in transforming institutions.