The Transformation of Asian Food Consumption and Russia as a Guarantor of Food Security in Asia
This paper examines the state of the global food problem, food security in East Asia and the opportunity for Russia to prevent a food deficit in North Korea. The authors analyze the symptoms of the global food problem, the theoretical approaches to food security, the transformation of food consumption in Asia and the food trade between Russia and the Korean Peninsula. One major conclusion is that Russia is in the best position among all the countries of the world to increase food exports to Asia – and especially to North Korea – while the Asian population’s habits of food consumption shape the new structure of food trade between that region and the rest of the world.
This volume incorporates the works of scholars examining more deeply the core issues of some of the big trends in relationships in Asia. Our academic symposium demonstrates KEI’s effort to provide constructive conversation and insightful analysis that will provide the policies for a strong U.S.-Korea alliance and U.S. foreign policy in Asia to ensure these trends develop in a positive direction. Whether you have a new or continuing relationship with reading this publication, we hope you enjoy the 25th edition of the Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies volume and the excellent work inside.
Currently, Russia has come to realize that a resolute turn to East Asia is a necessary means to both give impetus to economic modernization of its Far Eastern areas and strengthen its international positions. For these tasks to be a success, coordinating prospective planning with that of East Asian countries is a vital precondition. In this regard, worthy of attention is the gas pipeline from Russia to the Republic of Korea via the territory of DPRK. What factors are at present determining Russia’s renewed interest in the pipeline? And what strategic traps – if any – can Russia fall into in case the project is implemented?
For Russia, this issue is not new – it has been addressed in some way or another since the beginning of the 1990s. Various options concerning sources of gas supply, routes of transportation etc. have been explored. Simultaneously, the project has been a focus of special interest among Russian experts. With these factors in mind, an attempt to analyze the project in Russia’s priorities, both current and future, seems to be a timely exercise.
Using network approach, we propose a new method of identifying key food exporters based on the long-range (LRIC) and short-range interaction indices (SRIC). These indices allow to detect several groups of economies with direct as well as indirect influence on the routes of different levels in the food network.
On May 18-19, 2012, at the presidential retreat in Camp David in Maryland, U.S. president Barack Obama hosted the 38th annual G8 summit. The leaders discussed global economic growth, development, and peace and security. After less than 24 hours of face-to-face time among the leaders, they issued communiqué of only five pages. However, Camp David was a significant success. The leaders came together to effectively address the most pressing issues of the day while setting the direction for the summits that were to follow, including the summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Chicago, the G20 in Los Cabos, Mexico, and the Rio+20 Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. That success was propelled by several causes. The first is the set of strong global shocks were particularly relevant to a number of items on the agenda. This included the newest installment of the euro-crisis, spikes in oil and food prices, and the escalating violence in Syria. The second is the failure of the other major international institutions to address these challenges. The third is the club’s dedication to the promotion of democracy and its significance on issues such as the democratic transition in the Middle East and North Africa. The fourth is the high relative capabilities of G8 members, fuelled by the strength of the U.S. dollar, the Japanese yen and the British pound. The fifth is the domestic political control, capital, continuity, competence and commitment of the leaders in attendance. Camp David saw several G8 leaders returning for their sixth or seventh summit and leaders with a secure majority mandate and control of their legislative houses at home. Finally, the constricted participation at the remote and secluded Camp David Summit, a unique and original advantage of the G8 summit style, allowed for more spontaneous conversation and interpersonal bonds. Together, these interconnected causes brought the G8 back, as a broader, bigger, bolder centre of effective global governance.
Article considers theoretical prerequisites of creation of optimum hierarchical structure of system of monitoring of crucial parameters of food safety of Russia on the basis of application of the theory of indistinct sets.
Korean-Russian Jeju Forum 2012 was organized by the East Asia Foundation and was dedicated to relations between Russia and the countries of the Korean Peninsula.
The article reviews the progress of G20-B20 engagement since Toronto to St. Petersburg with the objective to identify which mechanisms and areas of cooperation are most effective to ensure continuity of the B20 efforts on the key priorities, the B20 influence on the G20 decision-making and the G20 compliance with commitments related to the B20 priorities. With this objective in mind the study is focused on two dimensions. The first dimension is B20 recommendations influence on G20 deliberation, direction setting and decision making on the basis of analysis of how the B20 specific recommendations are reflected in the G20 documents. The second dimension is B20 influence on G20 delivery on the pledges made, which is assessed by monitoring the G20 compliance with the B20 related commitments.
The authors assess the average level of the B20 recommendations reflection in the G20 documents as considerable, however its dynamics across presidencies is mixed. The average level of G20 members’ compliance on the B20 related commitments is lower than the G20 average score for compliance with general non B20 focused commitments. It can be explained by a shorter monitoring period and by the fact that the B20 related commitments are more specific. Key areas where cooperation can be most effective (financial regulation, employment, investments, trade) have been identified. Key factors of success have been revealed. The analysis shows that a high level of B20 recommendations’ inclusion into the G20 documents and actions does not guarantee subsequent implementation of the commitments made. The B20 should ensure continuity on their priority recommendations in the dialogue with the G20 and engage in the follow up process by more actively participating in the G20 agreed initiatives and projects at the national and global levels.
Progress on the B20 related commitment should be reviewed and made public for each summit. It can help to increase the level of effectiveness of B20 and G20 engagement.
Full report "From Toronto to Saint Petersburg: Assessing G20-B20 Engagement Effectiveness" is available at http://www.hse.ru/en/org/hse/iori/news/86843927.html