Valerii Leonidovich Abramov

This article assesses the industrial and agrarian potential of Central Asian countries as a foundation for enhancing the competitiveness of their national economies, given the region’s continued dependence on commodity price cycles and its transport-geographic isolation from the world’s major economic centers. The aim of the study is to provide a scientific justification for priority directions in forming integrated production structures capable of ensuring a full production cycle, based on a comprehensive comparative analysis of the industrial-agrarian potential of the five regional countries. The analysis rests on two groups of criteria – structural preconditions (natural resources, infrastructure development, labor availability) and quantitative economic indicators (GDP, industrialization level, exports, economic structure) – with the study organized around Kazakhstan as the regional leader. The scientific and practical significance of the work lies in systematizing accumulated knowledge on regional integration, a topic insufficiently studied in the international literature with respect to the post-Soviet space, and in identifying priority sectors (energy, chemical industry, agro-industrial complex) and specific commodity chains (cotton, grains, fruits and vegetables, dairy products, and others) promising for the formation of integrated structures. The contribution of the study lies in its cross-country comparison grounded in verified official data, with an explicit acknowledgment of analytical limitations (incomplete statistics, divergent national methodologies, and the descriptive-comparative rather than strictly causal nature of the conclusions). The practical value of the findings lies in their applicability to policy recommendations for sectoral ministries, as well as their potential to serve as a foundation for further institutional and investment-focused research.

This study assesses export concentration risk in four Central Asian economies (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan) by examining trade specialization patterns in 31 mineral, chemical, textile, and metallurgical product groups over 2017–2024. Using a multi-index framework based on Revealed Symmetric Comparative Advantage (RSCA), Relative Trade Advantage (RTA), and the Lafay Index (LI), the paper distinguishes structurally embedded competitive advantages from export signals that are weak, import-dependent, or potentially transient. The revised analysis adds explicit data consistency checks, a clarified classification rule, and robustness tests based on sign concordance, majority-index rules, and RSCA-only thresholds. The results show that Central Asia’s risk profile is highly persistent but heterogeneous: Tajikistan is exposed to extreme single-commodity risk in aluminium and cotton-related segments; Kazakhstan remains vulnerable to mineral-fuel concentration and energy-price volatility; Uzbekistan has broader but still labour-intensive textile specialization; and Kyrgyzstan shows ambiguous competitiveness that may partly reflect re-export and transit-related trade. Fully competitive product groups are confined mainly to resource- and labour-intensive activities, while chemicals and technologically complex manufacturing remain non-competitive across the region. The findings support risk-differentiated policy responses, including commodity-price hedging, counter-cyclical stabilization tools, downstream processing, textile upgrading, and regional value-chain development.

The article presents the results of the assessment of the dynamics of Russia’s non-resource non-energy exports to the BRICS+ countries for the period from 2015 to 2024, based on mirror statistics from partner countries. It has been established that most of these countries represent unstable markets with volatile demand dynamics. Countries with significant potential for increasing Russian non-resource non-energy exports are identified. The study identifies the characteristics of the trade structure and the sustainability of export flows, and highlights priority areas for trade cooperation. A correlation analysis is used to demonstrate the relationship between the import of Russian non-resource non-energy exports by each BRICS+ country and variables such as the oil price, GDP of these countries, and trade complementarity with Russia. However, the strength of these relationships and their nature vary across countries. It has been established that significant factors in the demand for Russian non-resource non-energy exports are the dynamics of the importing country’s GDP and the situation on the global oil market. Based on the results of the study of the dynamics of non-resource non-energy import volumes from Russia to the BRICS+ countries, a number of recommendations for increasing supplies to these markets are proposed.

The paper explains why the China-Mongolia-Russia Economic Corridor (CMREC) should play a bigger role in developing human resources for its member countries. This is particularly relevant for Russian regions aiming to keep their workforce. This study's goal is to show how important this transport corridor is for areas far from sea routes. It highlights its role in fostering regional growth and cooperation, improving transport infrastructure, and boosting the export capabilities of businesses. This affects labor development in Russian regions, their retention within the country, and the recruitment of skilled migrants from nations linked to the CMREC operational framework. The outcome validates the author's hypothesis: the international transport corridor and its surrounding infrastructure, for areas distant from water trade routes, stimulate the growth of human resource potential across various professional fields within Russian regions. This aids in keeping labor, by drawing skilled workers from nearby nations, which fosters the economic growth of the involved countries.

The article examines the methodological limitations of traditional competitiveness theories amid the transition to a polycentric global economy. Using a four-dimensional analytical framework and systemic approach, the study demonstrates that M. Porter’s paradigm, while valuable at micro level, proves insufficient for explaining contemporary structural transformations marked by digitalization, economic sovereignty, and value chain fragmentation. Empirical analysis reveals that Porter’s “diamond” determinants explain only 55–60% of economic growth variations, indicating theoretical gaps. The research highlights digital transformation as a key challenge, fundamentally reconfiguring all components of traditional models through AI, platforms, and new business models. As a theoretical alternative, the article proposes the concept of Sustainable Competitive Advantages (SCA), integrating macroeconomic regulation, industrial policy, and regional cooperation. Using the EAEU and comparative cases (China, Singapore), the study demonstrates the effectiveness of strategic protectionism and industrial cooperation. The findings have practical significance for developing new competitiveness indicators and policy tools adapted to polycentric realities.

The aim of the study is to develop and test approaches to constructing a composite index of the world economy’s technological core development, represented by the United States of America (USA), the European Union (EU), and China. The research applies general scientific, economic, and econometric methods. The methodological framework is based on principal component analysis, which enables the integration of key indicators of global hypercompetition and the strategic autonomy of national economies. The index incorporates parameters reflecting the state and dynamics of the economy, infrastructure, and technological development. The results assess the degree of self-sufficiency of technological cores in terms of access to critical resources and their dependence on certain goods and export markets. Empirical testing of the composite index demonstrates that in the 21st century, China has significantly narrowed the gap with the EU and the USA, most notably in advanced technologies and access to strategic resources. The EU and the USA hold roughly comparable positions as technological cores; however, since the 2008–2009 global financial crisis, the EU’s global competitiveness has been declining, reflected in its growing dependence on imports of knowledge-intensive information and communication technologies and research and development services. Conclusion . The proposed composite index clarifies theoretical approaches to the formation of a polycentric world economy, highlights the strengthened positions of new economic and technological centres, and provides a practical tool for assessing the maturity of technological cores.

The article dissects main characteristics of the EAEU regional value chains. The hypothesis of a positive correlation between member states’ participation in regional value chains and their intraregional industrial exports has been tested. The results obtained suggest a preferential shift to industrial goods in the intraregional trade since the launch of the integration; the most punctuated this shift is in chemical industry products and machinery. The study also identifies country-specific patterns in the involvement of EAEU countries in regional value chains. Russia’s dependence on cooperative links with its EAEU partners is relatively low. In contrast, the exports of Belarus and Kazakhstan rely greatly on the Russian value added. Generally, value added flows within the Union are heavily skewed towards Russia. It has been unveiled that forward linkages in regional value chains impact positively on the volume of intraregional industrial exports. At the same time, Russia is increasing its industrial exports to third countries by leveraging the region’s production base. In our opinion, EAEU integration institutions need to implement new programs aimed at leveling of structural disproportions of regional cooperation links. It is suggested that such measures should be sector-specific and take into account forward and backward cooperative linkages among EAEU countries.

In the article the problems of scientific productivity assessment are considered, its content is often reduced only to the choice of methods for measuring the size of the contribution to the scientific process (expert assessment, analysis of the dynamics of publications, etc.) and relatively little attention is paid to how the empirical picture is formed, on the basis of which the measurement is made. Thus, for a historian of science a scientific result is first of all a new substantially true statement about reality («scientific fact», «discovery», etc.). For the economist, the scientific result is primarily a newly created value. Finally, the notion of a scientific result as something empirically fixable and discrete in general can only be introduced if the cognitive movement is seen as «research», i. e. an action limited in time and resources. Therefore, the assessment of scientific productivity should be considered not only as a problem of the methodology of its measurement, but also as a methodological problem, i. e. in terms of explication and criticism of the assumptions on the basis of which this assessment is built.

This work was based on empirical studies of the credit register and loans issued, which have been compiled by all Russian banks since 2017, for the analysis of bank interest rates by a common factor and subject to the control of the characteristics of the loan. These dates identified bank-specific components in the management information system; also, the same data were used to measure the fragmentation of the accounting lending market in Russia. This paper illustrates the credit market in Russia during the COVID-19 pandemic by analyzing the management of loan rates with existing differences due to the heterogeneity of banks and borrowers in order to achieve a sustainable management system. The results show that the heterogeneity of banks’ decision-making when setting interest rates is high and increased at an early stage of the pandemic. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the banks tightened interest-free lending conditions during the pandemic for sustainable management goals.

The subject of this research is the international competitiveness of post-Soviet national economies, within the framework of a new integration association in the post-Soviet space – the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). In the context of studying the competitiveness of the member-states of international regional integration associations, the authors analyze and conditionally divide the scientific and theoretical reserve of Russian and foreign scholars into several key vectors of research. The article formulates the approaches towards assessing the impact of integration processes upon the competitiveness of national economies of the EAEU member-states. For the analysis of competitiveness of the participant countries in the integration alliance, the authors applied the methodology of the Global Competitiveness Index of the World Economic Forum. The competitiveness of participant countries of the alliance was examined in accordance with the eight main criteria: the effectiveness of state institutions, infrastructure, the level of macroeconomic stability, development of financial markets, effectiveness of goods and services market, effectiveness of the job market, development of human capital, and assessment of innovation activity. The conclusion is made that all the countries participating in post-Soviet integration association indicate positive dynamics in their international competitiveness, although its level differs considerably. The approach towards assessing the impact of integration upon the competitiveness is formulated. It is noted that the achievement of higher level of competitiveness is impeded by macroeconomic instability of the national economies of post-Soviet space. Recommendations are given in the formation of their competitive advantages within the framework of the integration union.