IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rnp/eurint/et2305.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Instruments of Social Policy of the Eurasian Economic Union (Part 2)
[Инструменты Социальной Политики Евразийского Экономического Союза (Часть 2)]

Author

Listed:
  • Rubtsov, Gennady (Рубцов, Геннадий)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration)

  • Misko, Oleg (Мисько, Олег)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration)

Abstract

Aim. Taking into account the above, the purpose of the study was to analyze the patterns of development of the social policy of the Russian Federation, the republics of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia, to consider their weaknesses and points of growth in order to identify the potential for strengthening integration ties based on the unification of social development tools. Task. To analyze various areas of social life of the EAEU member countries, identify similarities in development trends in order to create a basis for the formation of unified socio-economic transformations. To demonstrate social tools for the development of «transinstitutional interaction» within the boundaries of the Eurasian Economic Union. Methods. The following methods were used i n the article: comparative an alysis — to compare the effectiveness of social policy instruments in the EAEU countries. The novelty lies in the improvement of the integration processes of the Eurasian integration countries with the help of the proposed author’s approach to unify the social policies of the EAEU member countries on the basis of “transinstitutional cooperation”. Results. A comprehensive analysis of social policy instruments (migration, youth, labor, housing, etc.) of all participants in the Eurasian integration was carried out. Recommendations are proposed for improving social tools within the framework of “transinstitutional cooperation” of the EAEU states. Conclusion. The analysis of the instruments of social policy laid down the priorities in the development of the mechanisms of “transinstitutional cooperation” by the members of the EAEU, expressed in the author’s recommendations in this study. The Republics of Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Kazakhstan should focus on developing a unified strategy for youth and migration policies. The Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus should focus on population aging, providing older citizens with pension savings, and encouraging the development of family and motherhood institutions. This is disclosed in more detail in separate blocks of the study devoted to specific areas of social development of the EAEU countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Rubtsov, Gennady (Рубцов, Геннадий) & Misko, Oleg (Мисько, Олег), 2023. "Instruments of Social Policy of the Eurasian Economic Union (Part 2) [Инструменты Социальной Политики Евразийского Экономического Союза (Часть 2)]," Eurasian integration: economy, law, politics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, issue 3, pages 64-78.
    • Handle: RePEc:rnp:eurint:et2305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.ranepa.ru/rnp/eurint/et2305.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David G. Tarr, 2016. "The Eurasian Economic Union of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and the Kyrgyz Republic: Can It Succeed Where Its Predecessor Failed?," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(1), pages 1-22, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aleksei Valentinovich Bogoviz & Svetlana Vladislavlevna Lobova & Yulia Vyacheslavovna Ragulina & Alexander Nikolaevich Alekseev, 2018. "Russia s Energy Security Doctrine: Addressing Emerging Challenges and Opportunities," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(5), pages 1-6.
    2. Yu. D. Kvashnin, 2019. "The EAEU as Perceived by the Western Scientific and Expert Community (Bibliographic Essay)," Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law, Center for Crisis Society Studies, vol. 12(2).
    3. Cerqua, Augusto & Montalbano, Pierluigi & Temerbulatova, Zhansaya, 2024. "A decade of Eurasian integration: An ex-post non-parametric assessment of the Eurasian economic union," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    4. Falkowski Krzysztof, 2017. "Long-Term Comparative Advantages of the Eurasian Economic Union Member States in International Trade," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 53(4), pages 27-49, December.
    5. Victor Ye. Kovalev & Aleksandr N. Semin, 2021. "Resilience of Russia’s agri-food market under customs imbalances of the Eurasian integration," Journal of New Economy, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 22(3), pages 28-43, October.
    6. Andrzej Cieślik & Oleg Gurshev, 2022. "Friends with or without benefits? An empirical evaluation of bilateral trade and economic integration between some of the post-Soviet economies," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(4), pages 769-795, December.
    7. Gurshev Oleg, 2023. "Foreign direct investment and international trade across the former Soviet economies: What do we know after 30 years of research?," Journal of Economics and Management, Sciendo, vol. 45(1), pages 290-318, January.
    8. Alessandro Cascavilla & Jordi Ripollés & Andrea Morone, 2024. "Tax morale and social capital: An empirical investigation among European citizens," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95(2), pages 441-476, June.
    9. Amat Adarov, 2023. "Eurasian economic integration: impact evaluation using the gravity model and the synthetic control methods," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 159(2), pages 467-504, May.
    10. Christopher A. Hartwell, 2023. "In our (frozen) backyard: the Eurasian Union and regional environmental governance in the Arctic," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 1-22, April.
    11. Prema-chandra Athukorala, 2018. "Export structure and performance in a landlocked transitional economy: The case of Kyrgyz Republic," Departmental Working Papers 2018-24, The Australian National University, Arndt-Corden Department of Economics.
    12. Amat Adarov & Mahdi Ghodsi, 2021. "The impact of the Eurasian Economic Union–Iran preferential trade agreement on mutual trade at aggregate and sectoral levels," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(1), pages 125-157, March.
    13. Turakulov, Valijon, 2020. "Trade Policy Issues of Oil-rich but Land-locked Country Case: Focusing on Kazakhstan post-WTO entry," Conference papers 333223, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    14. Vinokurov, Evgeny, 2017. "Eurasian Economic Union: Current state and preliminary results," Russian Journal of Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 54-70.
    15. Irina Busygina & Mikhail Filippov, 2018. "Russia And The Eurasian Economic Union: Conflicting Incentives For An Institutional Compromise," HSE Working papers WP BRP 31/IR/2018, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    16. Stephan Barisitz & Mahdi Ghodsi & Peter Havlik & Waltraut Urban, 2016. "Monthly Report No. 10/2016," wiiw Monthly Reports 2016-10, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    17. Amanov, Shatlyk, 2021. "An empirical analysis of the EAEU’s voting behavior in the UN General Assembly, 2000–2020," OSF Preprints 6xfyu, Center for Open Science.
    18. Celbis, Mehmet Guney & Wong, Pui-hang & Guznajeva, Tatjana, 2018. "The Eurasian customs union and the economic geography of Belarus: A panel convergence approach," MERIT Working Papers 2018-029, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rnp:eurint:et2305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RANEPA maintainer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aneeeru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.