Moscow: IV RAS Publ., 2013, 288 p.
Kazakhstan has attracted a lot of attention from economists in recent years. A country with unique natural resources followed the path of radical economic reforms in the 1990s, which led to a significant decline in the economy, but in recent years it has been steadily developing on a new basis, showing an interesting example of successful reform. Yu. G. Alexandrov's book equally analyzes the specifics of Kazakhstan and the phenomenon of modernization on the example of this country. The author explores the question: "... what is the phenomenon of transition economies in contrast to developing economies, what do they have in common and what is the place of this new state with its own national specifics " (p. 281).
The analysis in this book is fundamental. The first chapter examines the economy of Kazakhstan during the Soviet period. Further, the development of the country after the collapse of the USSR and the current state of the economy are analyzed from a macroeconomic perspective, within the framework of institutional changes, in the context of the main industries. The article describes trends in the economy after the global crisis of 2008. The paper concludes with an analysis of Kazakhstan's prospects for modernization.
The formation of the Eurasian Economic Union, of which Kazakhstan is a member, further enhances the relevance and significance of research on the economy of this country. An objective assessment of the state and prospects of Kazakhstan is important both for the scientific community and for practitioners in the field of business and public administration.
Analyzing the fundamental changes in the economy of Kazakhstan, Yu. G. Alexandrov dwells on privatization. The four stages of privatization that stretched from 1991 to 2000 fundamentally changed the country. By 2008, material production and services, with the exception of education, healthcare, and utilities, were dominated by private ownership. In industry, only 0.5% of gross value added was produced in the public sector, while 0.1% was produced in trade and household repairs (p. 53). For a country that has practically skipped the capitalist phase of development as part of tsarist Russia and has moved to socialist industrialization as part of the USSR, such a leap poses a certain risk, since there is neither a tradition of entrepreneurship within the framework of an industrial society, nor trained personnel. The population is also not ready for a radical withdrawal of the state from the economy. Under these circumstances, Kazakhstan's leadership has used two insurance mechanisms: the already mentioned preservation of public services in education and healthcare and the attraction of foreign capital to industry. Its share in industry was 22.5% (p. 53).
We have given only one, as it seems to us, rather vivid episode of the process of reforms and modernization of Kazakhstan, presented in the monograph of Yu. G. Aleksandrov. The need to move forward quickly while maintaining balance in society and the economy is an important feature of any radical reform, but in Kazakhstan, the combination of innovation and social stability was a very difficult task, as Yu.G. Aleksandrov writes. It notes: "Efforts to adapt to new conditions have led to a painful reassessment of the social utility of many economic activities and the rejection of a significant part of them due to lack of demand" (p.129). Yu. G. Aleksandrov points out the change in sources of investment financing, the growth in the share of budget funds, loans, and foreign investment (p.130). This component concerns purely economic aspects, but Yu. G. Alexandrov devotes a significant place in his monograph to the analysis of the changing role of man in the economy in the new conditions, about which the sixth chapter "Man in the Economy" is written, which begins with a theoretical excursion - a discussion of the concept of "technological method of production". This category is used to analyze Kazakhstan's reality in the course of reforms. The practical consequences of the reforms in the field of human capital were the emigration of the Russian-speaking population, as well as the reduction of the urban population and the growth of the rural population. Yu. G. Alexandrov emphasizes that the deindustrialization of Kazakhstan, at least the structure of employment of its population, led not only to a reduction in the number of people employed in advanced high-tech industries, but also to a decline in work ethics. Agriculture and trade have become sump tanks for the released labor force, but in the conditions of Kazakhstan, this was a factor that prevented social instability.
Much attention in the monograph is paid to the fuel and energy complex of Kazakhstan, especially the oil and gas industry. They account for more than a quarter of the country's income, so such attention to this sector is quite justified. The third and fourth chapters are devoted to him. The author justifiably pays great attention to the structure of ownership of fossil resources (section "Privatization in the oil and gas industry"), making comparisons with Russian legislation. It is necessary to take revenge that the differences in the legislation of the two countries are significant.
In Kazakhstan, as Yu. G. Aleksandrov emphasizes, the state is the owner of mineral resources. However, there are no direct restrictions on the participation of foreign firms in the development and development of minerals. In Russia, private firms have the opportunity to take ownership of mineral resources in a tender organized by the state for the sale of geological reserves, but foreign participants have significant restrictions on admission to such tenders. Thus, the two countries in the CIS that have the largest oil reserves have taken different paths in the course of reforming this industry.
At the same time, similar steps have been taken in both countries. In Russia, the largest firm is Gazprom. The equivalent of Gazprom in Kazakhstan is KazMunayGas, which operates mainly in the oil industry, but also protects national interests in its industry, just like Gazprom. In the third chapter of this company and its subsidiaries, a large section is devoted, which examines the structure of firms, their main production assets, developed deposits and projects. The main features of the business of these firms are presented to the domestic reader in a concise form, but with sufficient specifics. In this part of the work, the author's task was precisely to highlight the most important thing from the flow of fairly extensive current economic information.
Yu. G. Alexandrov dwells on the objective achievements of Kazakhstan's development model. By the beginning of the global financial and economic crisis in 2008, Kazakhstan's GDP was 40% higher than in 1990. Of course, this success is mainly due to the development of the oil and gas sector - its share in GDP, as indicated in the monograph (p. 253), was more than 20%, but foreign exchange earnings from exports, as well as the growth of the oil and gas sector, In Russia, during the years of the crisis, they proved to be a shock absorber for external economic shocks.
Here it is important to focus on the author's principled position on the role of the export oil and gas sector in the economy. The thesis of a "raw materials curse" that prevents oil-producing countries from developing manufacturing industries is widely popular. This thesis has been in circulation since the years when oil production in the North Sea generated an influx of money to the Netherlands. The manufacturing industry of the country, which was among the most advanced in the world, really began to lag behind at this time. This fact was associated with the flow of oil money,
he called the curtailment of the manufacturing industry in the context of the development of oil exports a "Dutch disease". Just at this time, the processes of globalization were gaining strength, and competitors were growing, including in Japan and South Korea. Perhaps it was international competition that had a negative impact on the Dutch manufacturing industry, but the version that the reason for all this is oil exports turned out to be more popular.
On the basis of this concept, many countries and international organizations form industrial policy directions and develop advice to decision-makers on economic development strategies. Yu. G. Aleksandrov convincingly shows that the "oil curse" does not work on the example of Kazakhstan. According to the author, in the conditions of Russia, this "curse" also does not work. What else Russia and Kazakhstan have in common is, as Aleksandrov points out, low social labor productivity (p.255). The persistence of low-productivity industries and types of employment in the public economy hinders the modernization of the economy in both countries. At the same time, rapid changes in the employment structure mean large social changes, which are fraught with a loss of social stability.
Yu. G. Alexandrov's conclusion is very important that in transition societies that are experiencing the breakdown of the centralized system of planned economy and the transition to market conditions, active state intervention and the use of its redistributive capabilities are required. Naturally, the price for implementing such a development strategy is the expansion of the state apparatus, which is fraught with embezzlement and corruption, but the task of political power is precisely to balance all risks. It also raises the question of the direction and purpose of the movement. Even without any corruption or theft, significant national resources can be wasted with an unrealistic development strategy. In the context of globalization, setting national development goals is becoming a very difficult task.
A monograph on such a diverse topic cannot cover everything. Probably, more space could be given to the ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy of Kazakhstan, given the unique raw material base of this country and the strong production infrastructure of the industry.
The book is well made as a printing product, it is convenient for the reader and looks good. Some flaw in the appearance is the textual representation of numerical statistical material, while tables would look better and would be easier for the reader to digest.
The monograph turned out to be interesting due to the combination of a fundamental approach with a focus on the most important aspects of the country's development and a clear position of the author on key issues of Kazakhstan's development. It will be useful as a country study, interesting for both practitioners, and as a theoretical work on modernization issues, primarily in transition economies.
A. V. SUDYIN
* * *
The new monograph of the well-known economist Yu.G. Alexandrov is a logical continuation of his previous research on the economic problems of post-Soviet states. In particular, it directly echoes his fundamental work "Can Russia become a "Eurasian tiger", published in 2007.
Kazakhstan was not accidentally chosen as the object of research. This country, like the Russian Federation, has significant oil and gas reserves. This circumstance opens up great opportunities for economic development. But it is also an objective factor constraining the restructuring and diversification of the economy. Therefore, both Russia and Kazakhstan face a difficult task of finding the optimal economic policy that allows them to use revenues from the production and export of hydrocarbons for real economic development in the context of radical modernization and globalization of the world economy.
In his interesting and high-quality work, the author examines various aspects of the economy of Kazakhstan. In the first chapter on communist industrialization, he shows how the Soviet economic model worked in relation to the Soviet economy.
To Kazakhstan. The Soviet economic policy was based on the desire to create at all costs, first of all, the branches of heavy industry that form the basis of the military-industrial complex. Since Kazakhstan possessed a whole range of natural resources necessary for the development of such industries, enterprises related to the extraction and processing of coal, oil, metal ores and other raw materials for heavy industry were created at an accelerated pace in the republic. In a short period of time, primarily in the post-war period, the Kazakh SSR turned into an industrially developed republic. However, the economy of Kazakhstan fully displayed the features inherent in the Soviet economic system, in which economic activity often turned into meaningless "production for the sake of production".
Yu. G. Alexandrov carefully analyzes both positive and negative aspects of the economic development of Soviet Kazakhstan. The book shows in detail and in dynamics the sectoral structure of the national economy of the republic. At the same time, it emphasizes its one-sidedness and the lack of economic ties between enterprises. "The republic," the author writes, " took important positions in the mining and metallurgical complex and grain production on a union scale, and by the end of the Soviet era it had increased its presence in the oil industry. But all these types of economies were not sufficiently connected enclaves in a single system. The most important elements of their reproductive system were closed to the union center, and therefore the collapse of the USSR affected the economy of the republic as hard as the Russian one" (p.45).
In the following chapters, the author shows how difficult the transition of Kazakhstan from a planned distribution model to a market economy was. Thus, the second chapter is devoted to systemic changes in the economy, including changes in the constitutional foundations of the economic system, the privatization of various industries and spheres of economic activity, the formation of a new investment mechanism, the development of small and medium-sized businesses, as well as changes in the nature of workers ' ownership of their labor force. Moreover, all these aspects are considered in comparison with similar aspects of the Russian economy. The author notes the similarity of the processes that took place in both countries in the post-Soviet period, and at the same time points out significant differences between them.
A separate chapter is devoted to the oil and gas industry, which is rightfully considered the locomotive of Kazakhstan's economy. The author evaluates the potential of oil and gas production in this country in comparison with the potential of other states with industrial hydrocarbon reserves, and also shows how the privatization of the oil and gas sector of the Kazakh economy took place. At the same time, Yu.G. Alexandrov notes differences in the processes of privatization of oil and gas industries in the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan: if in the former of these countries the emphasis was placed on the creation of national private companies, then in the latter - on the broad attraction of foreign capital to the oil and gas sector (including on the basis of joint production sharing agreements). At the same time, a powerful state-owned oil and gas company KazMunayGas was established in Kazakhstan, which has a whole network of subsidiaries and divisions and is actively involved in all major projects related to the production and processing of hydrocarbons. The author analyzes in detail the activities of this leading national company, including its joint projects with foreign partners. Separately, the paper examines the role of China in the development of oil and gas production in Kazakhstan. The final part of the third chapter is devoted to the specific dynamics of energy resource extraction by their types and by individual regions of the country.
In the next, fourth chapter of the book, the main routes for exporting hydrocarbons from Kazakhstan are considered. This topic is very relevant for a country that is far from the traditional sea routes of oil and gas exports. "The fact that Kazakhstan, at the first stage of its independent development, relied on the export of hydrocarbons, being in the very center of the Eurasian continent and not having direct access to any of the open seas, prompted its state leadership to pursue a multi-vector foreign trade policy" (p.106). And then the paper shows the main possible directions of oil and gas export: by land through the territory of Russia to the Baltic and Black Seas; by land to the east to China; by the Caspian Sea to Baku, and from there via international pipelines to the Black and Mediterranean Seas; by the Caspian Sea to the ports of Iran and then through Iranian territory to the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea. All these areas are more or less in the sphere of interests of the largest players in the global oil and gas market. And Kazakhstan has to take this circumstance into account when determining the optimal routes
export of hydrocarbons. The author dwells in detail on Kazakhstan's cooperation with foreign countries, including Azerbaijan and Russia, in the field of energy transit, and also analyzes the real opportunities and prospects of the main ways of oil and gas transportation.
The fifth chapter of the paper is a kind of continuation of the second chapter and shows the concrete results of systemic changes in the economy of Kazakhstan, including the dynamics and structure of investments, including foreign direct investment, as well as changes in the development of the main sectors of the national economy in the context of the overall economic development of Kazakhstan. This chapter contains a large amount of carefully selected and carefully analyzed information.
The sixth chapter is devoted to the problem of efficient use of labor resources in Kazakhstan in the conditions of transition from the Soviet economic system to a full-fledged market economy. "The Soviet model of involving labor resources in the social economy," the author writes, "reproduced in a modernized form the essential features of archaic societies based on forcing workers to work" (p.161). At the same time, there was no real economic motivation to increase labor productivity both at individual enterprises and on the scale of the entire country's economy. And this has become a significant obstacle to the modernization of the economies of post-Soviet states. According to the author, both in Russia and Kazakhstan, "the relationship between low labor productivity and its cheapness has been an obstacle to the reorientation of the economy from the export of raw materials and products of its primary processing to the formation of a technologically modernized and diversified industrial and post-industrial structure since Soviet times" (p.164). Therefore, restructuring the labor relations system in the context of overall growth in labor productivity is one of the key economic challenges facing Kazakhstan. The paper analyzes various aspects of this problem, including demographic trends, changes in the structure of employment, changes in the wage system, and other aspects that affect the improvement of labor efficiency and the growth of the standard of living of the population.
The next, seventh chapter of the monograph examines the main trends of Kazakhstan's economic development in the 1990s and 2000s (up to the 2008 crisis). "The time that has passed since the appearance of the independent Republic of Kazakhstan on the world map can be divided into two periods. The first is the 1990s, during which its economy went through a near-catastrophic collapse due to the chaotic break of the former ties of the intra-union administrative-command division of labor and the centralized pricing system. But in the process of transition to private ownership and market criteria of rationality, its overall decline slowed down. At the same time, the foundations were laid for a new, mixed Kazakh-foreign organization of the oil and gas production sector as the main branch of the national economy. The second period - the 2000s - was a time of its uneven recovery growth based on the viable elements of the old economy against the background of the rapid expansion of the export oil and gas complex" (p. 208). It was the oil and gas industry that became the force that ensured the growth of Kazakhstan's gross domestic product. Therefore, the author pays special attention to this particular sector of the national economy. But at the same time, he does not forget other industries. And, what is extremely important, the paper not only examines the achievements and problems of the main industries, but also assesses the potential for future post-industrial development. This chapter concludes with an analysis of the impact of the global financial and economic crisis that began in 2008 on Kazakhstan's resurgent economy.
The last, eighth chapter of the paper is devoted to how Kazakhstan came out of the crisis and what tasks in the economic sphere it set for itself in the foreseeable future. "Measures to mitigate the impact of the crisis on the Kazakh economy," the author believes, " were generally relatively effective. Partly due to its relatively small size, and most importantly-the breakthrough of the export oil and gas sector. But at the same time, the crisis highlighted the precarious position of the country at the tip of the "oil needle". As well as the danger of any emergency situation for Kazakhstan as a state with pockets of economy scattered around the country's perimeter, with insufficiently developed intra-industry, inter-industry and interregional ties... It was these considerations that prompted the leadership of Kazakhstan to accelerate the program of development and modernization of the economy, the goals of which were outlined in the document "Kazakhstan - 2030" of 1997" (p.261). The monograph pays quite a lot of attention to
this program - its content and opportunities for implementation, including the financial and labor resources necessary for sustainable economic growth.
Thus, the author touched upon almost all the main aspects of the economy of modern Kazakhstan-from the economic "legacy" inherited from the Soviet times to the long-term program developed for the period up to 2030. In general, the structure of the work seems quite justified. But it might make sense to put the fifth chapter after the second, which it is essentially a development of. And the chapter devoted to the oil and gas sector of the economy should be placed after them.
I would also like to note that sometimes when reading sections that criticize the shortcomings of the Soviet economic model, it seems that the author implies the "harmfulness" of any serious state intervention in the economy. However, a closer look at the work shows that this is not the case. This, in particular, is explicitly stated in the conclusion. "The experience of reforms and the crisis in Kazakhstan," writes Yu. G. Aleksandrov, " has confirmed the now fairly obvious fact that in transition societies that were once involved in the process of socialist industrialization in one way or another, the strategy of economic modernization is not effective enough without the active participation of the state with its distributive capabilities in this process... At the same time...the decisive role ultimately belongs to encouraging the activity of national and (at first especially) foreign capital, as well as creating incentives for the population to work hard... Beyond a certain border, state intervention can be a barrier to establishing rational performance criteria in the economy... So, in transition states, it is particularly important to find the optimal balance between the private and public sectors of the economy, dirigism and liberalism, institutions of political democracy and state authorities " (p. 285). It is difficult to disagree with this statement of the author. And perhaps the conclusions and provisions of Yu. G. Alexandrov's monograph will help economists and politicians in the post-Soviet states to find such an "optimal ratio" and correctly determine the economic strategy that will allow them to successfully follow the path of modernization and economic development.
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2020-2025, BIBLIO.UZ is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of Uzbekistan |