The Conflict on the resource-extractive Mode of Development in Russia

Transcription

1 June 15 th 2015 The Conflict on the resource-extractive Mode of Development in Russia PhD Summer School Urban economic development and Urban governance in post-soviet space Felix Jaitner Vienna University

2 2 Outline 1) Russia and resource based development Role model for resource-extractivism? Conflicts around this mode of development 2) Theoretical framework for resource-extractivism 3) Centre vs. Periphery? regional development as a counter-strategy to resource-extractivism?

3 & Arms industries 3 Russian Case Study I High dependency on natural resources: (Share of non-renewable energy sources (oil, gas and coal) in total exports almost 70 %, Russland-Analysen 2014) Increased since dissolution of Soviet Union Major infrastructural projects: Pipeline construction (North Stream, Sibirean Strength) Dominant economic sectors: Resource-extraction, Finance & Banking, Construction, Commerce, Nuclear

4 4 Russian Case Study II Official goal to overcome one-sided mode of development: Modernisation-discourse (Importsubstitution, Reindustrialisation, economic growth) High-tech-clusters (Skolkovo, Nanotechnology) National-industrial champions (Aircraft, arms industry, nuclear industry)

5 Resource-extractivism and Political Economy Resource-extractivism Mode of development, not a mere technicaleconomic process Shapes power and societal structures both on national and international level (Internalization of external interests) Cleavages national level: - Commodification of nature - Appropriation of resource-rents: Unequal distribution - sustainability 5

6 Resource-extractivism and Political Economy Reproduction of power relations on international level: - Focus on foreign trade, but: highly dependent on import of foreign technology (industrial goods) and foreign capital (Becker 2008) World-market as a constitutive category: growthparadigm produces constant demand for resources (Brand/Wissen 2012) Resource-extractivism = specific form of capitalistic development: Peripheral societal development 6

7 Resource-extractivism and Political Economy Resource-extractivism and Uneven development: Dialectic relation? 1. Resource-extractivism = Product of uneven development Peripheral world-market integration: Raw-material supplier for industrial countries national development structurally limited 2. Resource-extractivism = Reason for uneven development structural limitation increases gap between (semi-)peripheral and core countries/regions 7

8 Russia s 10 largest enterprises by sales Rank Company Sector Sales 2007 USD Sales 2006 USD 1 Gazprom Oil and Gas , ,5 2 Lukojl Oil and Gas , ,7 3 Russian Railways Transport , ,9 4 Rosneft Oil and Gas , ,4 5 RAO UES Russia Electricity , ,0 6 TNK-BP Holding Oil and Gas , ,1 7 Surgutneftegaz Oil and Gas , ,7 8 Sberbank Banking , ,6 9 Norilsk Nickel Non-ferrous , ,0

9 Russia s top-10 exporters Rank Company Branch Exports 2001 USD Exports 2007 USD 1 Gazprom Oil and Gas , ,0 2 Lukojl Oil and Gas 6 624, ,0 3 Yukos Oil and Gas 5 682,2 n.a. 4 TNK Oil and Gas 5 597, ,0 5 Surgutneftegaz Oil and Gas 2 356, ,0 6 RusAl Non-ferrous Metals 2 231, ,0 7 Tatneft Oil and Gas 2 136, ,0 8 Slavneft Oil and Gas 1 762,7 n.a. 9

10 10 Centre vs. Periphery I Resource-extractivism = mode of development needs to be contextualized within the capitalist mode of production complex relation between world-market and local level is reproduced on all levels of societal interaction

11 Centre vs. Periphery II Regional development plans (Far east, Caucasus, Crimea) includes: formation of special economic zones, tax reliefs for private investors But: highly selective: important peripheral regions (Mono-towns, Russian Arctic) not (necessarily) included Focus on large-scale projects: side-effects for local economy? 11

12 Internationalisation of Russian companies radical change in social policy (Riabkova/Didyk 2014) increased pressure on regional governments and municipalities 12 Centre vs. Periphery III Regional development plans (Caucasus, Crimea, Far east) Limited to economic diversification institutional bias on resource extraction (especially in mono-industrial towns) impedes diversified economic development (Suutarinen 2014)

13 Conclusion Resource-extractive mode of development sets societal actors in Russia very limited corridors of action (Semi-)peripheral mode of development Russia: state policy very contradictory: part of the resource-extractive mode of development (Gazprom, Rosneft) vs. attempts to overcome it social forces carrying out a change towards a sustainable mode of development? 13

14 Statistics on Russian Companies: Liuhto, Kari/Vahtra, Peeter (2009): Who governs the Russian economy? A cross-section of Russia s 14 Bibliography Becker, Joachim (2008): Der kapitalistische Staat in der Peripherie: polit-ökonomische Perspektiven, in: Atac, Ilker/Lenner, Katharina/Schaffar, Wolfram: Kritische Staatsanalysen des globalen Südens, in: Journal für Entwicklungspolitik XXIV, 2, Brand, Ulrich/Wissen, Markus (2012): Crisis and continuity of capitalist society- nature relationships: The imperial mode of living and the limits to environmental governance, in: Review of International Political Economy, 20:4, Lang, Miriam/Mokrani, Dunia (2013): Beyond Development Alternative Visions from Latin America,Transnational Institute/Rosa Luxemburg Foundation, Amsterdam Quito. Riabova, Larissa/Didyk Vladimir (2014): Social License to Operate for Mining Companies in the Russian Arctic: Two Cases in the Murmansk Region: Russland-Analysen, Nr. 276, Suutarinen, Tuomas (2014): Resource-Based Development & the Challenge of Economic Diversification in the Mining Communities of the Murmansk Region: ( ).