|
on Confederation of Independent States |
|
Issue of 2017‒02‒19
six papers chosen by |
| By: | Ivan Sablin (National Research University Higher School of Economics) |
| Abstract: | The working paper offers a new interpretation of the intellectual and political genealogies of the Far Eastern Republic (1920–1922). The working paper demonstrates that the Far Eastern Republic was not a new project, as a similar formation was first proclaimed on April 10, 1918, in Khabarovsk as an autonomy within the Soviet Russian Republic under the name of the Soviet Republic of the Far East in line with the resolutions of the Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets. The Soviet Republic of the Far East was a product of regionalist and nationalist discourses and built on the ideas of decentralization which were widely discussed since the First Russian Revolution (1905–1907) by liberals and socialists alike and began to be implemented after the February Revolution (1917). The Chernobyl-born and Chicago-educated Bolshevik Aleksandr Mikhailovich Krasnoshchekov, who led the establishment of the Far Eastern Republic in 1920, also headed the Soviet Republic of the Far East in 1918. Its government, the Far Eastern Council of People’s Commissars (Dal’sovnarkom) defied the authority of the Central Executive Committee of Siberian Soviets (Tsentrosibir’) and disobeyed the Moscow central government implementing thereby a regionalist approach to Soviet federalism. Krasnoshchekov’s project relied on the ideas of the Populists (Narodniki), the Socialist Revolutionaries, and the Social Democrats which were tested in the Russian Far East during the First Russian Revolution and the interpretations of Far Eastern history and interests which were put forward by regional deputies in the Russian State Duma. The formation of the first Far Eastern republic was facilitated by the activities of Deputy of the Fourth Duma and Commissar of the Provisional Government for the Far East Aleksandr Nikolaevich Rusanov who led the formation of a regional organization uniting democratically elected zemstvo and municipal self-government bodies. |
| Keywords: | Russian Far East, State Duma, nationalism, regionalism, revolution |
| JEL: | Z |
| Date: | 2017 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hig:wpaper:142/hum/2017&r=cis |
| By: | Janda, Karel; Stankus, Elena |
| Abstract: | This paper provides an overview of biofuel’s markets in Russian Federation, Belarus and Ukraine and it estimates prospects of their future development in the context of global biofuels development. We first provide a general characterisation of biofuels, followed by description of development of biofuel industry in the key selected countries and the outline of current trends on the global market. This is followed by a quantitative analysis of the possible development of biofuels in Russian Federation, Belarus and Ukraine |
| Keywords: | Eastern Europe; Biofuels; Ethanol; Biodiesel |
| JEL: | P28 Q16 Q42 R11 |
| Date: | 2017–02–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:76728&r=cis |
| By: | Janda, Karel; Stankus, Elena |
| Abstract: | This paper provides an overview of biofuel’s markets and policies in Russian Federation. It shows that one of the many barriers that hinder biofuel development is strong oil and gas lobby, which cooperates with Russian government. The main obstacle for the development of biofuel’s sector in Russia is a significant lack of coherent policy and regulation. Creation of healthy biofuel’s sector requires authorities to found a new governing body, owning adequate rights, staffed with qualified personnel and resistant to the external influence. In order to reduce the uncertainty in biofuels sphere, the government would have to provide sustained long-term policy commitment and clarify the energy strategy. These actions would bring confidence in investments into sector of biofuels and motivate the growth within industry. Until the proposed incentives are not established on the legal base, the progress in the sector of biofuels is not possible. Even in case of the growing support from the government, the rapid flourishing of the sector is not expected. |
| Keywords: | Eastern Europe; Biofuels; Ethanol; Biodiesel |
| JEL: | P28 Q16 Q42 R11 |
| Date: | 2017–02–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:76729&r=cis |
| By: | Janda, Karel; Stankus, Elena |
| Abstract: | This paper provides an overview of biofuel’s markets Ukraine. While Ukraine has great competitive advantage in the production of biofuels based on availability of the feedstock and fertile soils, it does not utilize this opportunity despite the policy goal of decreasing energy dependence on Russian fossil fuels. In the recent years Ukraine was working on fulfilment of European standards in the sector of biofuels. Most importantly, as opposed to Russia, Ukraine has built legislative base which aims to support the industry development and offer large scale of benefits. But due to high excise duty, low oil prices and no penalties for not achieving established indicators, the biofuel industry still stays non-operating. |
| Keywords: | Eastern Europe; Biofuels; Ethanol; Biodiesel |
| JEL: | P28 Q16 Q42 R11 |
| Date: | 2017–02–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:76747&r=cis |
| By: | Janda, Karel; Stankus, Elena |
| Abstract: | This paper provides an overview of biofuel’s markets and policies in Belarus. Belarus remains the country with a critical level of energy dependence on Russia. Availability of cheap Russian sources and lack of diversification within energy sector hinder Belarus from expanding the potential of local energy resources. While energy independence and security, which is defined as share of local energy sources in the total energy balance, is declared as Belarusian priority, there is essentially no biofuels industry v Belarus. An interesting option of development of biofuels is a possibility of utilization of large areas unsuitable for human food or animal feed production because of Chernobyl nuclear disaster. |
| Keywords: | Eastern Europe; Biofuels; Ethanol; Biodiesel |
| JEL: | P28 Q16 Q42 R11 |
| Date: | 2017–02–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:76725&r=cis |
| By: | Alexander Tatarko (National Research University Higher School of Economics); Anna Mironova (National Research University Higher School of Economics) |
| Abstract: | This research assesses which values were related to the voting results of the Russian presidential election in March 2012. This empirical study was based on the results of a representative poll conducted in two federal districts of Russia (N=2058), which was held shortly after the elections. Participants were given Schwartz’s values questionnaire and were asked which of the five Russian presidency candidates they voted for. Empirical analysis showed that the respondents’ values were related to their political preferences. The study showed that the conservation–openness to change values were related to participants’ voting choices. The conservation values were related to four of the five candidates, which suggest an absence of key differences in the values represented by these politicians |
| Keywords: | basic values, political behaviour, voting, elections. |
| JEL: | Z |
| Date: | 2017 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hig:wpaper:72psy2017&r=cis |