IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/rrorus/v12y2022i3d10.1134_s2079970522700277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Development as a Challenge for “De Facto States”: Post-Conflict Dynamics and Perspectives in South Ossetia

Author

Listed:
  • A. B. Sebentsov

    (Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • M. S. Karpenko

    (Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • A. A. Gritsenko

    (Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • N. L. Turov

    (Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

The significance of economic factors in the emergence and development of “de facto states” remains insufficiently studied and debatable. This article deals with the case of South Ossetia, one of the six unrecognized republics that emerged in the post-Soviet space. Based on the study of statistical data, secondary sources and expert interviews with representatives of local authorities, business, and the academic community, the authors analyzed structural changes and the state of the economy of South Ossetia and views on development prospects in the context of state building. It has been shown that as a result of large-scale assistance from Russia, a structurally weak hyperservice economy has formed, whose key industries depend on government demand and Russian investments. Limited economic self-sufficiency, cross-border settlement of Ossetians and Georgians, as well as numerous family ties contribute to the emergence of a variety of cross-border practices (shuttle trade, smuggling, and peculiar payment systems) that reduce social tensions. The case of South Ossetia confirms that unrecognized status is not in itself an obstacle to economic development, but the lack of external legitimacy limits access to markets and creates difficulties for financial and trade transactions. As a result, Eurasian integration has become rather a source of problems for this republic, creating obstacles difficult to overcome for local businesses in trade with Russia, the only EAEU country that recognizes the Republic of South Ossetia as a sovereign state. As a result, economic problems, along with security issues, serve as a key argument for South Ossetia’s support for the idea of joining the republic to Russia.

Suggested Citation

  • A. B. Sebentsov & M. S. Karpenko & A. A. Gritsenko & N. L. Turov, 2022. "Economic Development as a Challenge for “De Facto States”: Post-Conflict Dynamics and Perspectives in South Ossetia," Regional Research of Russia, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 414-427, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:rrorus:v:12:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1134_s2079970522700277
    DOI: 10.1134/S2079970522700277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1134/S2079970522700277
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1134/S2079970522700277?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. V. A. Kolosov & A. B. Sebentsov & N. L. Turov, 2021. "Uncontrolled Territories in the Contemporary World: Theory, Genesis, Types and Dynamics," Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law, Center for Crisis Society Studies, vol. 14(1).
    2. Elias, Robert, 1986. "The Politics of Victimization: Victims, Victimology, and Human Rights," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195039818.
    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. Gang Wang & Peter Harms & Jeremy Mackey, 2015. "Does it take two to Tangle? Subordinates’ Perceptions of and Reactions to Abusive Supervision," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 487-503, October.
    2. Christine Henle & Michael Gross, 2014. "What Have I Done to Deserve This? Effects of Employee Personality and Emotion on Abusive Supervision," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(3), pages 461-474, July.
    3. Marr, Jennifer Carson & Thau, Stefan & Aquino, Karl & Barclay, Laurie J., 2012. "Do I want to know? How the motivation to acquire relationship-threatening information in groups contributes to paranoid thought, suspicion behavior, and social rejection," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 285-297.
    4. Marie Manikis, 2019. "Contrasting the Emergence of the Victims’ Movements in the United States and England and Wales," Societies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Al-Karim Samnani & Parbudyal Singh, 2016. "Workplace Bullying: Considering the Interaction Between Individual and Work Environment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 537-549, December.
    6. Raquel Brito & Carlos Pimenta, 2015. "Fraud in Municipalities. Research Project," OBEGEF Working Papers 045, OBEGEF - Observatório de Economia e Gestão de Fraude;OBEGEF Working Papers on Fraud and Corruption.
    7. Jan Philipp Czakert & Rita Berger, 2022. "The Indirect Role of Passive-Avoidant and Transformational Leadership through Job and Team Level Stressors on Workplace Cyberbullying," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-19, November.
    8. Hille, Patrick & Walsh, Gianfranco & Cleveland, Mark, 2015. "Consumer Fear of Online Identity Theft: Scale Development and Validation," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-19.
    9. Gonzalo Herranz de Rafael & Juan Sebastián Fernández-Prados, 2019. "Victimization, Social Structure and Psychosocial Variables: The Case of Spain in 1999 and 2016," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-10, March.
    10. Su-Ying Pan & Katrina Jia Lin, 2018. "Who Suffers When Supervisors are Unhappy? The Roles of Leader–Member Exchange and Abusive Supervision," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 799-811, September.

    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:spr:rrorus:v:12:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1134_s2079970522700277. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.