IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/78841.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Eurasian Economic Union: Asymmetries of Growth Factors

Author

Listed:
  • Khusainov, Bulat
  • Kireyeva, Anel
  • Sultanov, Ruslan

Abstract

The aim of the study is to assess the asymmetry of influence of factors of economic growth of national economies, which are included in the integration. Unlike previous research, the scientific significance of the obtained results consists in the use of a new method of study – external demand as a factor of economic growth, disaggregated into two components. The first is net exports mutual trade in goods within integration associations. The second is net exports of foreign trade in goods outside the integration. By use of these methods we have evaluated the contribution of these factors on economic growth of the Customs Union and the Common Economic Space (CU/CES), as well as Kazakhstan, Russia and Belarus. In the conducted analysis of scientific research was based on the fact that the economies of the member (CU/CES) are very different in scale, economic potential and volume of foreign trade. Based on this research we conclude: integration is developing successfully and efficiently only with the rise of the national economies of the member countries; to enhance economic growth and competitiveness of the countries of the Eurasian integration it is necessary to increase the volume of mutual trade of member countries of this integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Khusainov, Bulat & Kireyeva, Anel & Sultanov, Ruslan, 2017. "Eurasian Economic Union: Asymmetries of Growth Factors," MPRA Paper 78841, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:78841
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/78841/1/MPRA_paper_78841.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herzer, Dierk & Vollmer, Sebastian, 2013. "Rising top incomes do not raise the tide," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 504-519.
    2. Paul A. Samuelson, 1962. "Parable and Realism in Capital Theory: The Surrogate Production Function," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 29(3), pages 193-206.
    3. Avi J. Cohen, 1989. "Prices, Capital, and the One-Commodity Model in Neoclassical and Classical Theories," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 231-251, Summer.
    4. Harcourt,G. C., 1972. "Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521096720.
    5. Bulat Husainov & Andrey Shelomentsev & Svetlana Doroshenko, 2015. "Modern Integration Units: Comparative Analysis Of The Growth Factors," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 156-169.
    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. Harvey Gram & Geoffrey Harcourt, 2015. "Joan Robinson and MIT," Working Papers 9, City University of New York Graduate Center, Ph.D. Program in Economics.
    2. Yara Zeineddine, 2021. "Institutional Aspects of Capital in Joan Robinson's 'Rules of the Game': Rentier versus Entrepreneurs in Managerial Capitalism," Working Papers hal-03230146, HAL.
    3. Luigi L. Pasinetti, 2000. "Critique of the neoclassical theory of growth and distribution," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 53(215), pages 383-431.
    4. J. Barkley Rosser, 2020. "Austrian themes and the Cambridge capital theory controversies," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 415-431, December.
    5. Kazuhiro Kurose & Naoki Yoshihara, 2018. "The Heckscher—Ohlin—Samuelson Trade Theory and the Cambridge Capital Controversies: On the Validity of Factor Price Equalisation Theorem," Working Papers SDES-2018-17, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Nov 2018.
    6. Schefold, Bertram, 2008. "C.E.S. production functions in the light of the Cambridge critique," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 783-797, June.
    7. Kurose, Kazuhiro & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2016. "The Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson Model and the Cambridge Capital Controversies," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2016-05, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    8. Carlo Milana, 2019. "Solving the Reswitching Paradox in the Sraffian Theory of Capital," Applied Economics and Finance, Redfame publishing, vol. 6(6), pages 97-125, November.
    9. Charles R. Hulten, 2018. "The Importance of Education and Skill Development for Economic Growth in the Information Era," NBER Chapters, in: Education, Skills, and Technical Change: Implications for Future US GDP Growth, pages 115-146, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. repec:bap:eebook:02 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Bortis, Heinrich, 1996. "Structural economic dynamics and technical progress in a pure labour economy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 135-146, June.
    12. S K Mishra, 2010. "A Brief History of Production Functions," The IUP Journal of Managerial Economics, IUP Publications, vol. 0(4), pages 6-34, November.
    13. Hideyuki Kamiryo, 2014. "Earth Endogenous System: To Answer the Current Unsolved Economic Problems (Second Edition)," Earth Endogenous System: To Answer the Current Unsolved Economic Problems (Second Edition), Better Advances Press, Canada, edition 2, volume 2, number 01 edited by Dr. Yisheng Huang, May.
    14. Harvey Gram, 2003. "Joan Robinson: classical revivalist or neoclassical critic?," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 493-508.
    15. Villar Otálora, Juan Camilo, 2021. "Una revisión sobre los métodos convencionales de la contabilidad del crecimiento: La tiranía de la identidad [A review of the conventional methods of growth accounting: The tyranny of identity]," MPRA Paper 106683, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. G. C. Harcourt, 2015. "On the Cambridge, England, Critique of the Marginal Productivity Theory of Distribution," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 47(2), pages 243-255, June.
    17. repec:bap:ees2th:01 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Kersting, Götz & Schefold, Bertram, 2021. "Best techniques leave little room for substitution. A new critique of the production function," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 509-533.
    19. Kurose, Kazuhiro & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2018. "The Heckscher—Ohlin—Samuelson Trade Theory and the Cambridge Capital Controversies: On the Validity of Factor Price Equalisation Theorem," Discussion Paper Series 686, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    20. Garbellini, Nadia, 2020. "Measurement without theory, and theory without measurement: What's wrong with Piketty's capital in the XXI century?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 50-62.
    21. Avi J. Cohen, 2003. "Retrospectives: Whatever Happened to the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversies?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 199-214, Winter.
    22. Luigi L. Pasinetti, 2000. "Critique of the neoclassical theory of growth and distribution," Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 53(215), pages 383-431.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Globalization; Integration; Economic Growth; External Demand; Domestic Demand; Net Exports Trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

    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:pra:mprapa:78841. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.