"Revealed" comparative advantage: products mapping of the Russian agricultural exports in relation to individual regions

• Autorzy: Ishchukova N. , Smutka L.

Warianty tytułu

PL

"Ujawniona" przewaga komparatywna: analiza rosyjskiego handlu zagranicznego produktami rolnymi w rozbiciu na regiony

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper studies specialization and competitive performance of the Russian agricultural sector through analysis of “revealed” comparative advantage of country’s agricultural and food exports over the period 1998–2010. The aim of this analysis is to identify the main segments of the Russian agricultural export from the two points of view: international competitiveness and country’s trade balance. For the purpose of detailed analysis all commodities exported and imported by the Russian Federation can be divided into separate groups according to two parameters: the revealed comparative advantage (RSCA index by Dalum et al. [1998] and Laursen [1998]) and domestic trade-balance (trade balance index by Lafay [1992]). This analytical tool is named “products mapping”. In accordance with this methodology, we distinguished four groups of products. In the first group products have a comparative advantage and positive trade balance (5% of the exported goods, about 50% of the value of total agricultural exports). There was also identified an opposite group: all items have comparative disadvantage and negative trade balance (80% of items account for only about 30% of total exports, but 95–99% of the total imports). Further we identified one controversial group where products have comparative disadvantages, but have a positive trade balance. In most cases the products have comparative advantages in relations to the CIS, EU or Asian countries, while trade in these products in relation to countries located in Africa and Americas in most cases does not exist.

PL

W artykule zanalizowano zagadnienia handlu zagranicznego Rosji produktami rolnymi w latach 1998–2010. Wszystkie eksportowane produkty podzielono na grupy według dwóch parametrów: ujawnionych przewag komparatywnych (wskaźnik RSCA) oraz krajowego bilansu handlowego. W ten sposób uzyskano cztery grupy produktów: cechujące się przewagą komparatywną i dodatnim bilansem handlowym (5% eksportowanych produktów; około 50% wartości eksportu produktów rolnych), charakteryzujące się ujemnym bilansem handlowym i brakiem przewagi komparatywnej (w tej grupie 80% produktów ujętych ilościowo stanowi zaledwie 30% wartości eksportu, a jednocześnie 95–99% importu), produkty bez przewagi komparatywnej, a jednocześnie zachowujące dodatni bilans handlowy oraz produkty z przewagą komparatywną i ujemnym bilansem handlowym. Na podstawie analiz można wywnioskować, że w przypadku większości produktów Rosja ma przewagę komparatywną nad krajami WNP, UE oraz azjatyckimi, chociaż wobec krajów afrykańskich i z obu Ameryk ta przewaga nie występuje.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

comparative advantage; product; Russia; agricultural product; export; region; foreign trade; trade balance

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: 13
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.45-61,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Ishchukova N.

• Department of Economics, PEF, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamycka 129, 165 21 Prague 6 - Suchold, Czech Republic

autor

Smutka L.

• Department of Economics, PEF, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamycka 129, 165 21 Prague 6 - Suchold, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• Ahrend R. 2004. Russian industrial restructuring: Trends in productivity, competitiveness and comparative advantage. Routledge Journals 18 (3), 277–295.
• Balassa B., 1965. Trade liberalization and “revealed” comparative advantage. The Manchester School of Economics and Social Studies 33 (2), 99–123.
• Cooper J., 2006. Can Russia compete in the global economy? Eurasian Geography and Economics 47 (4), 407–425.
• Dalum B., Laursen K., Villumsen G. 1998. Structural change in OECD export specialization patterns: de-specialization and ’stickiness’. International Review of Applied Economics 12 (3), 423–443.
• ICTSD, 2012. Possible Effects of Russia’s WTO Accession on Agricultural Trade and Production. Programme on Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development (40).
• Lafay G., 1992. The Measurement of Revealed Comparative Advantages. In: M.G. Dagenais and P.A. Muet (Eds.). International Trade Modeling. Chapman & Hill, London.
• Laursen K., 1998. Revealed comparative advantage and the alternatives as measures of international specialization. Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics DRUID, Working Paper 98 (30).
• Ricardo D., 1817. On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. John Murray, London. OECD, 2008. Russia Agriculture Policy Review, Economic Survey, Paris, 1–5.
• Russian Presidential Administration, Doctrine of Food Security, Strategy of National Security of the Russian Federation till 2020. RF President Decree No. 537 of May 12, 2009.
• Tabata S., 2006. Observations on changes in Russia‘s comparative advantage, 1994-2005. VH Winston & Son 47 (6), 747–759.
• Westin P., 1998. Comparative Advantage and Characteristics of Russia’s Trade with the European Union. Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
• Widodo T., 2008. “Products Mapping” and Dynamic Shift in The Patterns of Comparative Advantage: Could India Catch Up China? Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies. 1 (3), 200–213.
• Widodo T., 2009. Comparative Advantage: Theory, Empirical Measures and Case Studies. Review of Economic and Business Studies 2 (2), 57–81.