Abstract
The chapter examines the ongoing energy integration in the Eurasian Economic Union. Not being comparative in a strict sense, the chapter draws relative perspectives on the Eurasian Common Energy Markets vis-à-vis the Energy Union in the European Union. Implemented upon the theory of institutions, the analysis demonstrates the differences between the ideas, interests and institutional environments underpinning the Eurasian and European energy integrations. The chapter shows that the Eurasian common energy markets are influenced by the member states’ self-interested interpretation of traditional ideas for energy integration. The Eurasian supranational institutions are designed upon the established national contexts of limited access order. The European Energy Union is inspired by novel ideas and new institutional solutions propagating authentic energy integration. Given the importance of the Eurasian energy suppliers to the European Union, the chapter speculates about the prospective interaction between the two energy integrations and contemplates possible institutional transformations to enable such cooperation.
This research was supported by Waseda University grant-in-aid BARD00523801 and 2019R-069.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Kompas pobiditelei. (2016, June 19). Rossiiskaya gazeta. Retrieved from https://rg.ru/2016/06/19/regszfo/vladimir-putin-proekt-bolshoj-evrazii-otkryt-i-dlia-evropy.html.
- 2.
The purchases of Turkmen gas were stopped in 2016 over a mix of reasons, but in late 2018 Gazprom announced the resumption of the trade from 2019.
- 3.
Retrieved from www.gazprom.com/about/production/projects/deposits/kyrgyzstan/.
- 4.
Ministry of Energy Infrastructures and Natural Resources of the Republic of Armenia. Retrieved from http://www.minenergy.am/en/page/540.
- 5.
Sem’ vajnyh proektov, kotorye nikak ne mogut realizovat’ v Tsentral’noi Azii (2018, February 5). CA-portal. Retrieved from http://www.ca-portal.ru/article:40646.
- 6.
O kontseptsii formirovaniya obshchego electroenergeticheskogo rynka Yevraziiskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza (2015, May 8); O kontseptsii formirovaniya obshchego rynka gaza Yevraziiskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza (2916, May 31); O kontseptsii formirovaniya obshchikh rynkov nefti i nefteproduktov Yevraziiskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza (2016, May 31). Retrieved from http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/energetikaiinfr/Pages/default.aspx.
- 7.
Dogovor o Yevraziiskom Ekinomicheskom Soyuze. (2014, May 29). English version: Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/acc_e/kaz_e/WTACCKAZ85_LEG_1.pdf.
- 8.
Lukashenko prizval “provesti revisiyu” doqovora o Yevrazes (2016, October 28). Ria Novosti. Retrieved from https://ria.ru/economy/20161028/1480193958.html.
- 9.
The so-called tax manoeuvre is designed to improve the efficiency of the Russian oil sector. In essence, the export duties are replaced with the severance tax. Effectively, this means that Belarus will not be able to enjoy lower—export duties exempt—oil price.
- 10.
European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) Treaty. (1951, April 18). Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, Paris.
- 11.
Euratom Treaty. (1957, March 25). Treaty Establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, Rome.
- 12.
Council of the European Union. (1964, April 21). Protocol of Agreement on Energy Problems. Official Journal 069: 1099–1100. Brussels: European Council.
- 13.
European Commission. (1968, December 18). First Guidelines for a Community Energy Policy: Memorandum Presented by the Commission to the Council. COM (68) 1040 Final. Brussels: European Commission.
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
Protocol on Energy Efficiency and Related Environmental Aspects. (1994, December 17). Retrieved from https://energycharter.org/process/energy-charter-treaty-1994/energy-efficiency-protocol/.
- 17.
The International Energy Charter Consolidated Energy Charter Treaty with Related Documents. Transparency Document (With Annex W, Modified into a Positive List of the Applicable WTO Provisions). Retrieved from https://energycharter.org/fileadmin/DocumentsMedia/Legal/ECTC-en.pdf.
- 18.
Russia signed the ECT in 1994 but did not ratify it, having, however, provisionally applied it in 1994–2009. Belarus did not ratify the ECT but provisionally applies it.
- 19.
The Lisbon Treaty, Article 194. Retrieved from http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-onthe-functioning-of-the-european-union-and-comments/part-3-union-policies-and-internal-actions/title-xxi-energy/485-article-194.html.
- 20.
Directive 2009/73 concerning the common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55, OJ L211/94, art 11(3)(a).
- 21.
Energy Union and Climate. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/energy-union-and-climate_en.
- 22.
Energy Union Package. (2015, February 25). A Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/energy-union-and-climate_en.
- 23.
- 24.
- 25.
- 26.
- 27.
Put on hold in 2014 at the initiative of the EU in the aftermath of Crimea.
- 28.
- 29.
Itogi VEES: odobreny programmy formirovaniya obshchikh rynkov gaza, nefti i nefteproduktov. (2018, December 7). Retrieved from http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/nae/news/Pages/07_12_2018_1.aspx.
- 30.
Obshchii rynok energoresursov EAES – muki rozhdeniya. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://eurasian-studies.org/archives/7432.
References
Abdraimov, A. (2019, July 8). Kakaya dinamika tsen na rossiiskii gaz mozhet ozhifat’ Armeniyu? Ritm Yevrazii. Retrieved from https://www.ritmeurasia.org/news–2019-07-08–kakaja-dinamika-cen-na-rossijskij-gaz-mozhet-ozhidat-armeniju-43675.
Andersen, S., Goldthau, A., & Sitter, N. (2017). Energy Union: Europe’s new Liberal Mercantilism. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Andoura, S., & Vinois, J. A. (2015). From the European Energy Community to the Energy Union: A policy proposal for the short and the long term. Series Report. Series New Decision-Makers, New Challenges. Jacquez Delores Institute.
Balmaceda, M. (2015). The politics of energy dependency: Ukraine, Belarus, and Lithuania between domestic oligarchs and Russian pressure. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Barnes, A. (2019, January 21). The latest amendment to a directive only add to the legal muddle. Natural Gas World. Retrieved from https://www.naturalgasworld.com/ggp-the-romanian-revision-makes-a-bad-directive-worse-67387.
Beckman, K. (2017, November 16). The European Commission’s last-ditch effort to stop Nord Stream 2: How likely is it to succeed? Energypost.eu. Retrieved from https://energypost.eu/european-commissions-last-ditch-effort-stop-nord-stream-2-likely-succeed/.
Berkhahn, A., & Kruse, M. (2019, February). Fourth revision of the proposed amendment of the gas directive further muddying of the waters? Arthur D. Little global report. Retrieved from http://www.adlittle.com/en/fourth-revision-proposed-amendment-gas-directive.
Beyers, J. (2005). Multiple Embeddedness and Socialization in Europe: The Case of Council Officials. International Organisation, 50, 899–936.
Blockmans, S. (Ed.). (2019). What comes after the last chance commission? Policy priorities for 2019–2024 (p. 104). Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies.
Blockmans, S., Kostanyan, H., Remizov, A., Slapakova, L., & van der Loo, G. (2017). Assessing European neighbourhood policy perspectives from the literature. Brussels and London: CEPS & Rowman and Littlefield International.
BP Statistical Review of World Energy. (2018, June). 67th edition (pp. 14 and 28). Retrieved from https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/en/corporate/pdf/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2018-full-report.pdf.
Buchan, D., & Keay, M. (2015). Europe’s long energy journey: Towards an energy union?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chichkin, A. (2019, January 16). Tranzitny separatism na neftyanom prostranstve EAEU/ CIS dominiruet. RitmYeavrazii. Retrieved from https://www.ritmeurasia.org/news–2019-01-16–tranzitnyj-separatizm-na-neftegazovom-prostranstve-eaes-sng-dominiruet-40554.
Clifton, J., Comı́n, F., & Fuentes, D. D. (2006). Privatisation in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(5), 736–756.
Coelho, C., & Grojec, W. (2018, September 12). Pipeline from hell? Nord Stream 2 and why it’s so contentious. Radio Free Europe. Retrieved from https://www.rferl.org/a/29486007.html.
Cram, L. (1997). Policy-Making in the European Union: Conceptual Lenses and the Integration Process. New York: Routledge Research in European Public Policy.
Derkul, O. (2019, March 12). Soyuzny dogovor Rossii i Belorussii: ryvok ili stagnatsiya? Ritm Yevrazii. Retrieved from https://www.ritmeurasia.org/news–2019-03-12–sojuznyj-dogovor-rossii-i-belorussii-ryvok-ili-stagnacija-41525?fbclid=IwAR3wwI1PyFgJ-Uo_Y-Ksg5HHBn0vmlM8aeCiK7w0YoTpC2BIuBm1uRKDPME.
Dragneva, R., & Wolczuk, K. (2012). Russia, the Customs Union and the EU: Cooperation, stagnation or rivalry? Chatham house briefing paper REP BP, 1.
Dragneva, R., & Wolczuk, K. (2013). The Eurasian Customs Union: Framing the analysis. In R. Dragneva & K. Wolczuk (Eds.), Eurasian economic integration: Law policy and politics. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
Ellinas, C. (2019). Ukraine: Gazprom’s key to flexibility. Natural Gas World,4(5), 27–31.
Ezhov, S., & Tyrtov, E. (2018, November). Zavershenie nalogovogo manevra. Epizod I – Dempfer. Vygon Consulting. Retrieved from http://vygon.consulting/upload/iblock/7e7/vygon_consulting_end_of_tax_maneur_ep1.pdf.
Fischer, S., & Geden, O. (2015). Limits of an “Energy Union”: Only pragmatic progress on EU energy market regulation expected in the coming months. SWP Comment 2015/C 28. German Institute for International and Security Affairs.
Georgiou, N., & Rocco, A. (2017). The energy union as an instrument of global governance in EU-Russia energy relations: From fragmentation to coherence and solidarity. Geopolitics, History, and International Relations,9(1), 241–268.
Greif, A. (2006). Institutions and the path to the modern economy: Lessons from medieval trade (political economy of institutions and decisions). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gurzu, A. (2015, June 10). Europe’s energy (dis)union. Retrieved from https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-energy-union-community-infrastructure-pipelines-interconnectors-plan-juncker/.
Haas, E. (1958). The Uniting of Europe: Political, social and economic forces, 1950–1957. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Haas, E. (1961). International integration: The European and the universal process. International Organization,15, 366–392.
Hall, P. (1997). The role of interests, institutions, and ideas in the comparative political economy of the industrialized nations. In M. I. Lichbach & A. S. Zuckerman (Eds.), Comparative politics: Rationality, culture, and structure (pp. 174–207). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, P., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harjanne, A., & Korkonen, J. (2019). Abandoning the concept of renewable energy. Energy Policy,127, 330–340.
Heinrich, A. (2017, September 12). Energy issues in Russia’s relations with Belarus. Russian Analytical Digest, 12(206), 14–16.
Hoffmann, S. (1966). Obstinate or obsolete? The fate of the nation-state and the case of Western Europe. Daedalus,95, 862–915.
Hoffmann, S. (1982). Reflections on the nation-state in Western Europe today. Journal of Common Market Studies,21, 21–37.
Howarth, D., & Roos, M. (2017). Pushing the boundaries new research on the activism of EU supranational institutions. Journal of Contemporary European Research,13(1), 1007–1024.
Howorth, J. (2012). Decision-making in security and defense policy: Towards supranational inter-governmentalism? Cooperation and Conflict,47(4), 433–453.
Jegen, M. (2014). Energy policy in the European Union: The power and limits of discourse (Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po, n° 2). Centre: D’etudes Europeennes.
Khatinoglu, D. (2019, February 12). Baku ratifies Caspian Convention. Natural Gas World. Retrieved from https://www.naturalgasworld.com.
Kirkham, K. (2016). The formation of the Eurasian Economic Union: How successful is the Russian regional hegemony? Journal of Eurasian Studies,7, 111–128.
Kucherov, N. (2019, January 10). Minsk deistviteljno ne ponimaet, chto takoe obshchii rynok gaza s Rossiei, ili delaet vid? Ritm Yevrazii. Retrieved from https://www.ritmeurasia.org/news–2019-01-10–minsk-dejstvitelno-ne-ponimaet-chto-takoe-obschij-rynok-gaza-s-rossiej-ili-delaet-vid-40463?fbclid=IwAR1MiD4GaKNXxyO__Oq7WXSUXPt8a-3j_Vl-R9NGir6rfY68YPz6SvPVE7s.
Kustova, I. (2017). Towards a comprehensive research agenda on EU energy integration: Policy making, energy security, and EU energy actorness. Journal of European Integration,39(1), 95–101.
Łada, A., Skłodowska, M., Szczepanik, M., & Wenerski, L. (2015). The Energy Union: Views from France, Germany, Poland and the United Kingdom. Warsaw: Institute of Public Affairs European Programme.
Lindberg, L., & Scheingold, S. (1970). Europe’s would-be polity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Lukashenko, A. (2011, October 17). O sudjbakh nashei integratsii. Izvestiya. Retrieved from http://www.izvestia.ru/news/504081.
Maltby, T. (2013). European Union energy policy integration: A case of European Commission policy entrepreneurship and increasing supranationalism. Energy Policy,55, 435–444.
Maszczyk, P., & Rapacki, R. (2012). Varieties of capitalism in transition countries. Warsaw: Warsaw School of Economics.
Milward, A. (1984). The reconstruction of western Europe 1945–1951. London: Methuen.
Milward, A. (1992). The European rescue of the nation-state. London: Routledge.
Moravcsik, A. (1998). The choice for Europe: Social purpose & state power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Moravcsik, A. (1999). A new statecraft? Supranational entrepreneurs and international cooperation. International Organization,53(2), 267–306.
Nazarbaev, N. (2011, October 25). Yevraziiskii soyuz: ot idei k istorii budushchego. Izvestiya. Retrieved from http://www.izvestia.ru/news/504908.
Nolke, A., & Vliegenthart, A. (2009). Enlarging the varieties of capitalism: The emergence of dependent market economies in East Central Europe. World Politics,61(4), 670–702.
North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
North, D., Wallis, J., & Weingast, B. (2009). Violence and social orders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nosovich, A. (2018, November 7). Gazoprovod s rossiiskim gazom zamenit Pribaltike litovsky SPG-terminal. RuBaltic.Ru. Retrieved from https://www.rubaltic.ru/article/ekonomika-i-biznes/07112018-gazoprovod-s-rossiyskim-gazom-zamenit-pribaltike-litovskiy-spg-terminal/?sfns=mo.
Nye, J. (1971). Peace in parts: Integration and conflict in regional organization. Boston, MA: Little Brown.
Parkhomchik, L. (2016). Natural gas industry of Kazakhstan: Key features and future prospects. Retrieved from http://eurasian-research.org/en/research/comments/energy/natural-gas-industry-kazakhstan-key-features-and-future-prospects.
Pastukhova, M., & Westphal, K. (2018). Eurasian Economic Union integrates energy markets: EU stands aside. SWP Comments C 05. Retrieved from www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/comments/2018C05_puk_wep.pdf.
Putin, V. (2011, October 3). Novyi integratsionnayi proekt Yevrazii – budushchee, kotoroe rojdaetsya segodnya. Izvestiya. Retrieved from http://www.izvestia.ru/news/502761.
Ringel, M., & Knodt, M. (2018). The governance of the European Energy Union: Efficiency, effectiveness and acceptance of the winter package 2016. Energy Policy,112, 209–220.
Rustemova, A. (2011). Political economy of Central Asia: Initial reflections on the need for a new approach. Journal of Eurasian Studies,2(1), 30–39.
Sandholtz, W., & Zysman, J. (1989). 1992: Recasting the European bargain. World Politics,42(1), 95–128.
Schimmelfennig, F., & Rittberger, B. (2005). Theories of European integration: Assumptions and hypotheses. In J. Richardson (Ed.), European Union: Power and policy-making. London: Routledge.
Schirm, S. (2016). Domestic ideas, institutions or interests? Explaining governmental preferences towards global economic governance. International Political Science Review,37(1), 66–80.
Schmitter, P. (1969). Three neo-functional hypotheses about international integration. International Organization,23, 61–166.
Shadrina, E. (2018). The common gas market of the Eurasian Economic Union: Progress and prospects for the institutionalisation. Region: Regional Studies of Russia, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, 7(1), 105–137.
Shadrina, E. (2019a). Energy cooperation and security in Central Asia: The possible Synergy between hydrocarbon rich and water rich countries. In F. Taghizadeh-Hesary, N. Yoshino, Y. Chang, & A. Rillo (Eds.), Achieving energy security in Asia: Diversification, integration, and policy implications. Singapore: World Scientific Press.
Shadrina, E. (2019b). Renewable energy in Central Asian Economies: Role in reducing regional energy insecurity. In N. Yoshino, F. Taghizadeh-Hesary, Y. Chang, & T.-H. Le (Eds.), Energy Insecurity in Asia: Challenges, Solutions, and Renewable Energy. Tokyo: ADBI Press.
Shustov, A. (2019, July 5). Gaz ili integratsiya? V Moskve i Minske Soyuzny dogovor poka vidyat po-raznomu. Ritm Yevrazii. Retrieved July 5, 2019 from https://www.ritmeurasia.org/news–2019-07-05–gaz-ili-integracija-v-moskve-i-minske-sojuznyj-dogovor-poka-vidjat-po-raznomu-43635?sfns=mo?print=1?print=1?print=1?print=1.
Stern, J. (2019). Narratives for natural gas in decarbonising European energy markets. OIES PAPER: NG141. Oxford, UK: The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
Stone Sweet, A., & Fligstein, N. (Eds.). (2001). The institutionalization of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stone Sweet, A., & Sandholtz, W. (1997). European integration and supranational governance. Journal of European Public Policy,4(3), 297–317.
Szulecki, K., Fischer, S., Gullberg, A. T., & Sartor, O. (2016). Shaping the ‘Energy Union’: Between national positions and governance innovation in EU energy and climate policy. Climate Policy,16(5), 548–567.
Tkachyov, I., & Feinberg, A. (2017, April 2). Skrytyi schyot na $100 mlrd: кaк Rossiya soderzhit belorusskuyu ekonomiku. RBC. Retrieved from https://www.rbc.ru/economics/02/04/2017/58e026879a79471d6c8aef30.
Verdiyeva, S. (2018). The Eurasian Economic Union: Problems and prospects. Journal of World Investment and Trade,19, 722–749.
Vinokurov, E., & Libman, A. (2012a). Eurasian integration: Challenges of transcontinental regionalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Vinokurov, E., & Libman, A. (2012b). Eurasia and Eurasian integration: Beyond the Post-Soviet borders. In The economics of the Post-Soviet and Eurasian integration. EDB Eurasian Integration Yearbook. Almaty: Eurasian Development Bank.
Volgin, Y. (2018, March 26). Formirovanie obshchego elektroenergeticheckogo rynka EAES. Retrieved from http://eurasian-studies.org/archives/7432.
William, P. (2019, January 14). German gas lobby rebuts US Ambassador. Natural Gas World. Retrieved from https://www.naturalgasworld.com/german-gas-lobby-rebuts-us-ambassador-67291.
Williams, N. (2018, October 12). Russian oil monopoly over Belarus Persists in bilateral trade agreements. Retrieved from https://www.irinsider.org/easterncentral-europe/2018/10/18/russian-oil-monopoly-over-belarus-persists-in-bilateral-trade-agreements.
Zemskova, K. (2018). The common energy market of the Eurasian Economic Union: Implications for the European Union and the role of the Energy Charter Treaty. Occasional Paper Series. Energy Charter Secretariat.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Overview and Interpretation of Principal Legal Provisions for Common Energy Markets of Eurasian Economic Union
The legal foundations for the CEM are laid out by Chapter 20 of the EAEU Treaty. Separate protocols to the EAEU Treaty, the Annexes 21, 22 and 23, contain the principal provisions for the formation of the Common Electric Power Market (CEPM), the Common Gas Market (CGM) and the Common Market for Oil and Petroleum Products (CMOPP).
Annex 21 provides the principles and terms for access to the services of natural monopolies in electricity. Art. 3 stipulates that the CEPM interlinks the national electric grids, which are operated upon the member-states regulation. According to Art. 5 containing the references to Chapters 18 and 19, the member-states are oriented at gradual harmonisation of their legislation with a principal course being towards fair competition and liberalisation of the national electricity markets. Arts. 7, 8 and 9 explain various aspects of the interstate transmission of electric power with the key point being that the legislation of a member-state through whose territory such transmission takes place is to be applied. Art. 11 stipulates that the pricing and tariff policy are determined by the national legislation of a member-state through whose territory electricity is transmitted, but such prices and tariffs cannot be higher than those effective in the domestic electricity market of a respective member-state. The embedded Appendix contains the methodology for the interstate transmission of electricity.
The Concept for the formation of the CEPM (2015) concretises its goals and objectives (Chapters 2 and 3); characterises the forms of trade, such as trade under the bilateral interstate agreements, as well as trade among market agents, including trading at the exchanges (Chapter 5); specifies the subjects of the CEPM (Chapter 6); elucidates the price and tariff aspects in a way that the national legislation is effective only for the cases when natural monopolies are concerned (but the prices and tariffs cannot be higher than those effective for the national market), otherwise market and market actors define pricing and tariffs (Chapter 9); and sets the timeline for the market formation and stipulates that it shall become fully operational by July 2019 (Chapter 13). The Concept contains the special opinion of Belarus that the CEPM shall be operated as fully competitive only after the CGM is created. This reflects the difficulties in reaching the consensus in the process of CEPM formation.
The Program for the Formation of the CEPM (2016) elaborates the provisions of the Arts. 81 and 82 of Chapter 20, Annex 21 and the CEPM Concept. The Program confirms the timeline for the CEPM formation, defines the principles of interstate electricity trade and transmission and stipulates their forms (Chapter 3); describes the organisation of trade in electricity (Chapter 4); explains the functioning of capacity market (Chapter 5); and specifies the regulation of CEPM (Chapter 6).
The Protocol on the Amendments to the EAEU Treaty in Respect to the Formation of the CEPM (September 7, 2018) clarifies further details on the formation and functioning of the CEPM. Art. 4 of Chapter 2 emphasises that the CEPM respects the rules of fair competition and functions upon market principles. The Memorandum on Cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Commission and the Electric Power Council of the Commonwealth Independent States (October 30, 2018) envisages consultative, non-binding, nature of the interaction between the two electricity systems on a range of related issues.
Concerning the CGM, the Annex 22 addresses the principles and conditions for the EAEU member-states’ access to the services of natural monopolies in gas transporting sector and the principles of pricing and tariff policy. The Art. 3.1 of the Annex affirms principles for the formation of the common natural gas market, including non-application of import or export duties. Arts. 3.4 and 3.5 affirm that the member-states intend to harmonise their legal systems and ensure ecological safety. Arts. 5 and 6 of Annex 22 state that the CGM shall operate at the market, preferably equally profitable for gas sellers, prices. This provision has already created significant debates among the member-states. Art. 7 of Annex 22 addresses the commercial conditions for the third-party non-discriminatory access to the transportation of natural gas implying that such matters shall be regulated by the member-states based on the provisions of their national legislations. This implies that the EAEU has no supranational authority over the prices and tariffs of natural gas transportation.
Chapter 3 of the Concept for the Common Gas Market (2016) outlines the principles and objectives of its formation (such as enhanced energy security, improved efficacy of the national gas transportation systems, adoption of market pricing, use of national currencies in gas trade, among others). Chapter 4 defines the timeline for the launch of the CGM. The preparatory stage continues till 2020 when the legal and technical harmonisation shall be implemented, the gas balance shall be formed and the bottlenecks for the CGM functioning shall be examined and attended. By 2022, the access to the transportation systems shall be ensured to the subjects implementing shipments in the fulfilment of gas balance, gas exchanges shall become operational and investment into the gas sector, including infrastructure, shall materialise. From 2025, the CGM shall become operational upon market pricing and equally profitable prices in intra-CGM trade. Chapter 5 provides that trade in gas will be implemented under a direct bilateral contract or run through a gas exchange. According to Chapter 6, the member-states’ legislation will regulate the matters of gas transportation in a respective territory ensuring that the interests of gas consumers, producers and natural monopolies are met.
The Program for the Formation of the Common Gas Market (2018) confirms that the CGM will be effective from 2025. The Program reemphasises the importance of market pricing and non-discriminatory access to the gas transporting systems, among other things. Chapter 1 specifies various organisational forms of trade, such as supply under the bilateral agreements, long- and short-term contacts, and exchange trading. The Program presents a range of actions towards the materialisation of the CGM, such as the development of gas exchanges, adoption of rules for the access to the gas transporting systems, as well as pricing and tariff policy.
In the oil sector, Annex 23 is dedicated to the organisation, functioning, governance and development of the CMOPP. Annex 23 outlines the CMOPP’s principles, which are similar to those for the CGM. Art. 7 of Annex 23 provides that tariffs for the transportation services of oil and petroleum products are determined upon the national legislation of member-states, but these tariffs cannot be higher than those for the domestic economic entities through the territory of which such oil and petroleum products are transported. Art. 9 states that the regulation of internal markets of oil and petroleum products is implemented by the national authorities of the member-states.
The Concept for the CMOPP (2016) reiterates the importance of the principles of market pricing and non-discriminatory access to the transportation systems, but nearly cancels out these statements by the provision that natural monopolies preserve their practices on pricing, tariffs and access rules in accordance with the national legislation of a respective member-state. The Concept specifies two forms of trade: under bilateral (or multilateral) contract and at the oil and petroleum products exchange, and describes other forms of activities in the CMOPP, such as transit, extraction, transportation and processing of oil. The Concept envisions a range of measures towards the implementation of the CMOPP, such as the harmonisation of technical standards of oil and petroleum products, harmonisation of national legislation, and investment in production, transportation and processing, among others.
The Program for the Formation of the CMOPP (2018) reaffirms the establishment of the common market by 2025 presenting a set of measures scheduled into three stages: 2018–2021, 2024 and 2025. By 2021, it is expected to develop legislation for the regulation of the CMOPP (trade, in particular), access to the transportation systems, technical standards for oil and petroleum products, organisation of the system and procedures for information exchange, and harmonisation of respective national legislations of the member-states, among other things. The international treaty on CMOPP shall be coordinated among the member-states by 2024 so that it would become effective by 2025.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shadrina, E. (2020). Energy Integration in Eurasian Economic Union: Preliminary Study on Progress and Policy Implications. In: Akimov, A., Kazakevitch, G. (eds) 30 Years since the Fall of the Berlin Wall. Palgrave Studies in Economic History. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0317-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0317-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-0316-0
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-0317-7
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)