Advertisement

Studies on Russian Economic Development

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 101–113 | Cite as

Industry-level effects from integration between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan through industrial cooperation

  • V. A. Salnikov
  • A. A. GnidchenkoEmail author
  • D. I. Galimov
Economies of Cis Countries

Abstract

An approach to estimating the potential effect from strengthening of comparative advantages in manufacturing industries due to intensification of industrial cooperation in the course of shaping the Common Economic Space has been suggested. The approach is based on estimating the interrelation of comparative advantages in final and intermediate commodities of the industry and empirically defining the labor productivity gap between the enterprises with the growing and decreasing staff.

Keywords

Productivity Growth RUSSIAN Economic Development Foreign Direct Investment Inflow Trade Integration Import Competition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    O. Osipova and S. Pukhov, “Experience of the international integration and scenarios of development of EurAsEC,” Ekon. Obozr. EurAsEC+, No. 3 (11), (2007).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. MacDonald, “Does import competition force efficient production?” Rev. Econ. Stat. 76 (4), (1994).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Amiti and A. Khandelwal, “Import competition and quality upgrading,” Rev. Econ. Stat. 95 (2), (2014).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Acemoglu, P. Aghion, and F. Zilibotti, “Distance to frontier, selection, and economic growth,” J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 1 (3), (2006).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Woelfl, I. Wanner, O. Roehn, and G. Nicoletti, “Product market regulation: extending the analysis beyond OECD countries,” OECD Econ. Dep. Work. Pap., No. 799, (2010).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Revenga, “Exporting jobs? The impact of import competition on employment and wages in US manufacturing,” Quart. J. Econ. 107 (1), (1992).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Bernard, J. Jensen, and P. Schott, “Survival of the best fit: exposure to low-wage countries and the (uneven) growth in US manufacturing plants,” J. Int. Econ. 68 (1), (2006).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Amiti and J. Konings, “Trade liberalization, intermediate inputs, and productivity: evidence from Indonesia,” Am. Econ. Rev. 97 (5), (2007).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Topalova and A. Khandelwal, “Trade liberalization and firm productivity: the case of India,” Rev. Econ. Stat. 93 (3), (2011).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. Kasahara and J. Rodrigue, “Does the use of imported intermediates increase productivity? Plantlevel evidence,” J. Dev. Econ. 87 (1), (2008).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Goldberg, A. Khandelwal, N. Pavcnik, and P. Topalova, “Imported intermediate inputs and domestic product growth: evidence from India,” Quart. J. Econ. 125 (4), (2010).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Baily, E. Bartelsman, and J. Haltiwanger, “Downsizing and productivity growth: myth or reality?” NBER Work. Pap., No. 4741, (1994).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Hsieh and P. Klenow, “Misallocation and manufacturing TFP in China and India,” J. Econ. 124 (4), (2009).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Banerjee and B. Moll, “Why does misallocation persist?” Am. Econ. J.: Macroecon. 2 (1), (2010).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Jones, “Intermediate goods and weak links in the theory of economic development,” Am. Econ. J.: Macroecon. 3 (2), (2011).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Arnold, G. Nicoletti, and S. Scarpetta, “Regulation, resource reallocation and productivity growth,” EIB Pap. 16 (1), (2011).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Petrin, J. Reiter, and K. White, “The impact of plant-level resource reallocations and technical progress on U.S. macroeconomic growth,” Rev. Econ. Dyn. 14 (1), (2011).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    L. Foster, J. Haltiwanger, and C. Krizan, “Aggregate productivity growth: lessons from microeconomic evidence,” NBER Work. Pap., No. 6803, (1998).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Unleashing Prosperity: Productivity Growth in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2008).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. Foster, J. Haltiwanger, and C. Syverson, “Reallocation, firm turnover, and efficiency: selection on productivity or profitability?” Am. Econ. Rev. 98 (1), (2008).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    D. Brown and J. Earle, “The reallocation of workers and jobs in Russian industry: new evidence on measures and determinants,” IZA Dis. Pap., No. 564, (2002).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    D. Brown and J. Earle, “Understanding the contributions of reallocation to productivity growth: lessons from a comparative firm-level analysis,” IZA Dis. Pap., No. 3683, (2008).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    F. Alcala, “Specialization across goods and export quality, Universidad De Murcia,” Dep. Fund. Anal. Econ. Work. Pap., No. 1, (2014).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    E. Jaimovich and M. Vincenzo, “Love for quality, comparative advantage, and trade,” Carlo Alberto Notebooks, No. 216, (2012).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. A. Salnikov
    • 1
  • A. A. Gnidchenko
    • 1
    Email author
  • D. I. Galimov
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Economic Forecasting of the Russian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations