IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/3840.html

Russia's European Economic Integration: Escapism and Realities

Author

Listed:
  • Hamilton, Carl B

Abstract

Both Russia and the EU are undertaking significant changes in foreign trade relations. Russia seeks WTO accession and the EU has concluded negotiations enlarging the union with ten new members. Against this background, what economic relationship can EU and Russia develop? The Paper analyses the asymmetric trade structure, the unstable and confused trade relation, as well as both form and content of EU’s and Russia’s options for the future. Conclusions are e.g. that (i) present EU trade policy vis-à -vis Russia is a disturbing flight to the future away from today’s concrete policy problems. The aim of a ‘European Economic Space’ (EES) is unrealistic for reasons of sovereignty and legality. To pursue an EES could be counter-productive for Russia from an economic perspective, since it focuses on the wrong problem. (ii) EU trade policy re-enforces Russia’s Dutch disease. (iii) With the candidate countries as EU members, Russia will meet lower tariffs but new anti-dumping measures. The asymmetry in EU-Russia trade will become more, not less, pronounced. Since Russia is hurt by the EU’s agricultural policy (CAP), Russia is likely to confront the CAP once Russia has become a member of WTO.

Suggested Citation

  • Hamilton, Carl B, 2003. "Russia's European Economic Integration: Escapism and Realities," CEPR Discussion Papers 3840, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:3840
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP3840
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rolf J. Langhammer & Matthias Lücke, 1999. "WTO Accession Issues," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6), pages 837-873, August.
    2. Robert M. Stern, 2002. "An Economic Perspective on Russia's Accession to the WTO," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 472, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    3. Finger,J. Michael & Francis Ng & Wangchuk, Sonam, 2001. "Antidumping as safeguard policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2730, The World Bank.
    4. Esanov, Akram & Raiser, Martin & Buiter, Willem, 2004. "Nature'S Blessing Or Nature'S Curse: The Political Economy Of Transition In Resource-Based Economies," Discussion Papers 18761, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    5. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2001. "Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 102, July.
    6. Paul Brenton & John Sheehy & Marc Vancauteren, 2014. "Technical Barriers to Trade in the European Union: Importance for Accession Countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DISTRIBUTION AND DEVELOPMENT Empirical Studies of Trade Policies, chapter 6, pages 105-124, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hamilton, Carl B., 2005. "Russia's European economic integration: Escapism and realities," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 294-306, September.

    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. Hamilton, Carl B., 2005. "Russia's European economic integration: Escapism and realities," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 294-306, September.
    2. Jensen, Hans G. & Frandsen, Søren E., 2003. "Implications of EU Accession of Ten New Members: The Copenhagen Agreement," Conference papers 331098, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Maryla Maliszewska, 2004. "EU Enlargement: Benefits of the Single Market Expansion for Current and New Member States," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0273, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Sabiroglu, Ilkin M. & Bashirli, Samad, 2012. "Input–output analysis in an oil-rich economy: The case of Azerbaijan," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 73-80.
    5. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2012. "On the measurement of trade costs: direct vs. indirect approaches to quantifying standards and technical regulations," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 401-414, July.
    6. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/5l6uh8ogmqildh09h2q8j620g is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Balistreri, Edward J. & Mavroidis, Petros C. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2021. "What If? Tinkering with the Counterfactual: A Comment on US–Washing Machines (Article 22.6-US)," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 421-435, October.
    8. Clougherty, Joseph A. & Grajek, Michał, 2014. "International standards and international trade: Empirical evidence from ISO 9000 diffusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 70-82.
    9. Abdur Chowdhury, 2003. "Wto Accession: What???S In It For Russia?," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 2003-595, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    10. Patrick Messerlin, 2010. "The European Community commercial policy," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-00972936, HAL.
    11. Ghoneim, Ahmed Farouk, 2004. "Competition, Cultural Variety and Global Governance: The Case of the Egyptian Audiovisual System," Report Series 26109, Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
    12. Castilho, Marta Reis, 2004. "Integração regional e conteúdo de trabalho do comércio exterior brasileiro," Oficina de la CEPAL en Brasilia (Estudios e Investigaciones) 37924, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    13. Ian Wooton & Maurizio Zanardi, 2002. "Trade and Competition Policy: Anti-Dumping versus Anti-trust," Working Papers 2002_6, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow, revised Oct 2002.
    14. Frandsen, Soren E. & Jensen, Hans G., 2001. "GTAP at Work in Denmark - Quantifying and Qualifying a Political Debate," Conference papers 330899, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Joseph Francis Francois & Douglas Nelson & Annette Pelkmans-Balaoing, 2008. "Endogenous Protection in General Equilibrium: estimating political weights in the EU," Economics working papers 2008-15, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    16. Ahmed Nawaz Hakro & Syed Hasanat Shah, 2007. "Economic Rationale, Trade Impact and Extent of Antidumping – A Case Study of Pakistan," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 12(1), pages 79-98, Jan-Jun.
    17. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5l6uh8ogmqildh09h2q90i5i1 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Inmaculada Martínez‐Zarzoso & Anca M. Voicu & Martina Vidovic, 2020. "Production networks in Europe: A natural experiment of the European Union enlargement to the east," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 1143-1163, November.
    19. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Voicu, Anca M. & Vidovic, Martina, 2020. "Production networks in Europe: A natural experiment of the EU enlargement to the east," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 390, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    20. Arjan M. Lejour & Ruud A. De Mooij & Richard Nahuis, 2001. "EU Enlargement: Economic Implications for Countries and Industries," CESifo Working Paper Series 585, CESifo.
    21. Hagemejer, Jan & Michalek, Jan, 2006. "Standardization union effects: the case of EU enlargement," MPRA Paper 22989, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    22. Thomas J. Prusa, 2005. "The Growing Problem of Antidumping Protection," NBER Chapters, in: International Trade in East Asia, pages 329-366, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • F02 - International Economics - - General - - - International Economic Order and Integration
    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • F17 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Forecasting and Simulation
    • P31 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist Institutions and Their Transitions - - - Socialist Enterprises and Their Transitions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpr:ceprdp:3840. 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: CEPR (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cepr.org/ .

    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.