CC BY-NC-ND
50
A. Amirbekova, N. Kulbatyrov1
Conditions for Access of Kazakhstani Goods to Foreign Markets2
The article examines opportunities and limitations of export growth of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the medium term. The methods for determining the quantitative and qualitative export parameters have been studied and selected. Calculations of indicators characterizing the export potential have been made, namely, evaluation of the product quality based on comparative advantages (Balassa index), evaluation of product export potential based on the export proportion in intra-industry trade (Grubel-Lloyd index). Comparative analysis of volumes, mechanisms, measures and export barriers of manufactured goods in Kazakhstan has been conducted. Certain suggestions to eliminate these barriers have been made. The paper corroborates that expanding the coverage of foreign markets with products that have proved their competitiveness on other markets may become a prospective path for further growth and improvement of the export product range. In the context of the adopted National export strategy, the paper systematizes measures and recommendations for improving the export policy, which may contribute to accelerating economic growth and further development of Kazakhstan's foreign economic activity as a factor of closer integration into the world economy.
Key words: export competitiveness, Balassa index, intra-industry trade, non-tariff barriers, Grubel-Lloyd index, World Trade Organization, Eurasian Economic Union.
JEL: F13
Introduction
Significance of the reseach paper has been predetermined by existence of interdependent pressing issues in Kazakhstan during the current modernization stage for its economy, particularly the necessity of export strategy development and adaptation of the country to the WTO terms [1].
1 Ainur S. Amirbekova — PhD in Economics, Chief expert of the Center for Trade Policy Development, Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan. E-mail: <[email protected]>;
Kulbatyrov Nurlan Naizabekovich — MSc, Deputy Director-General of the Center for Trade Policy Development, Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan. E-mail: <[email protected]>.
2 The article was submitted in January 2018.
Under the WTO terms the most controversial issues during the export strategy implementation are considered to be mutual trade intensification that influences the country's policy in its export activities as well as application of non-tariff regulatory measures.
Kazakhstan on its modern stage has been developing the measures of investment, institutional and other policy directions that shape economic policy of the country. In 2005, Kazakhstan made an unsuccessful attempt at creating models of export development priorities in industrial development strategy represented in the program of «30 corporate leaders» [2]. However, the positive trend in country rating was mostly due to realized complex measures of entrepreneurship support and development e.g. programs «Productivity-2020» [3], «Employment-2020» [4], «Business Road Map 2020» [5], «Program on the development of single-industry towns 2012-2020» [6], «Agrobusiness-2020» [7], and others, but export problems of the country remained unstated.
Before that the industrial policy of the country covered diversification issues of economic sectors in Kazakhstan in order to eliminate its raw materials orientation and to create conditions for transition to service-technology economy (SIID 2003-2010) [8]. Later, the emphasis was put on diversification and increasing competitiveness of the economy, strengthening its social parts in long-term perspective (SPFIID 2010-2014) [9]. Further, the State Program of Industrial and Innovative Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2015-2019 (GPIIR 2015-2019) [10] set new tasks that contained increasing value added, especially in priority sectors; increasing employment; expansion of markets for non-resource-based commodities; transition to a new level of technological effectiveness of priority manufacturing sectors and creation of a basis for further development of sectors through formation of innovative clusters; stimulating entrepreneurship and developing SMEs in the manufacturing industry [11].
In August 2017, the Program «National export strategy of the Republic of Kazakhstan» for 2018-2022 was adopted. It specifies a certain indicator of its success, namely the volume of non-resource-based exports of the country in 2022 should be increased by 1.5 times compared to the volume of 2015. However, in order to implement the export strategy, basic benchmarks are needed, which may include the results of this research and certain ways of its implementation. Author's recommendations on the ways of increasing exports could contribute to this.
The basis of the research methodology was general scientific methods such as systems analysis, methods of mathematical and logical modeling, methods of analysis and synthesis, including Balassa method of comparative advantage and the method of estimating the export potential of products based on the share of exports in the intra-industry trade (Grubel-Lloyd index).
Intra-industry trade development of the Republic of Kazakhstan with WTO and EAEU members
Within the national product competitiveness examination, the analysis of trade flows represents particular significance. Processes such as joining the WTO and the EAEU, and growth of mutual cooperation between many organizations contribute to export promotion. Export, as well as import, are products of particular phases of the technology process. Implementation of intra-industry trade opens an opportunity for mutual innovations and technology exchange, increasing economic potentials, finding new directions with the view of differentiation of the trade classification, foreign trade liberalization, liquidation of barriers in the foreign trade area, reducing tariff rates and growth of direct foreign investments.
Being aware of geographical and sectoral opportunities for the state industrial capacity makes it possible to monitor dynamics of the intra-industry trade index. The results of the intra-industry trade evaluation allow to control basic aspects of the integrational process, e.g. joining the EAEU as well as the WTO. The growth | of the intra-industry trade index influences exports.
1 a
| According to estimation results (see Table 1), Kazakhstan's intra-industry trade has not been characterized by a sufficiently high level. Nevertheless, this indicator is close S, to 1, which indicates a country's intention to develop its trade within its sectors.
TS
I
Table 1
Intra-industry trade share in commodity turnover of Kazakhstan during 2001-2016, GL index
Period RK-World RK-WTO members RK-EAEU members
2001 0.85 0.98 0.78
2002 0.86 0.97 0.76
2003 0.9 0.94 0.77
2004 0.93 0.82 0.76
2005 0.95 0.79 0.64
2006 0.96 0.79 0.6
2007 0.97 0.84 0.6
2008 0.98 0.71 0.65
2009 0.97 0.82 0.6
2010 0.97 0.6 0.74
2011 0.98 0.6 0.64
2012 0.98 0.79 0.56
2013 0.98 0.72 0.52
2014 0.98 0.67 0.65
2015 0.97 0.79 0.63
2016 0.96 0.81 0.58
Source: [12].
Kazakhstan's intra-industry trade with WTO member states demonstrates a positive trend after Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. It could be assumed that joining the WTO positively impacts the intra-industry trade.
As far as trade relations with the EAEU members are concerned, there is a downward change in index. From the moment of the CU creation the intra-industry trade index has dropped from 0.74 in 2010 to 0.58 in 2016. Slowdown in intra-in-dustry trade with the EAEU states is explained by different levels of their economic development and also the level of factor endowment.
The product competitiveness of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the world market
According to the chosen methodology, Balassa index has been calculated for determining the level of Kazakh product competitiveness on the world market. The evaluation of the level of Kazakh product competitiveness was made by using statistic data from the informational platform Trade Map, which was developed by the International Trade Center UNCTAD/WTO (ITC) and designed for collecting and reflecting data on world trade statistics [13]. In order to create the whole picture, indexes were calculated also for those trade positions where exports were only during one year from the whole considered time duration.
In accordance with Balassa index, Kazakhstan's export competitiveness has been evaluated by goods and countries. In the first case the level of export competitiveness and the alteration in its internal competitiveness structure during the assessed period were estimated. In the second case the geographical structure of country competitiveness, i.e. the competitiveness of Kazakh export goods on the world market as a whole and separately by countries, was evaluated.
According to Balassa index caculations, by 2016 the quantity of export trade positions of RK reached 2,694, of which 246 were competitive while others were non-competitive ones.
The competitive trade positions share in total export volume from the beginning of the period under consideration declined from 12% to 9%. At the same time, the total quantity of export goods items has increased. Hence, the share of noncompetitive trade positions on the world market of goods of RK has remained prevailing in Kazakh total export volume (88% in 2001 and 91% in 2016), which might be considered as a negative trend (see Table 2).
Table 2
Results of Balassa index calculations for export products of RK, 2001-2016
Period All exported commodity positions Number of positions with RCA > 1 Share in total exports, % Number of positions with RCA < 1 Share in total exports, %
2001 1 935 234 12 1 701 88
2002 1 837 241 13 1 596 87
2003 1 931 257 13 1 674 87
2004 2 018 213 11 1 805 89
2005 2 041 204 10 1 837 90
2006 2 046 196 10 1 850 90
2007 2 003 199 10 1 804 90
2008 2 132 180 8 1 952 92
2009 2 234 156 7 2 078 93
2010 2 052 144 7 1 908 93
2011 2 439 161 7 2 278 93
2012 2 438 164 7 2 274 93
2013 2 462 181 7 2 281 93
2014 2 477 196 8 2 281 92
2015 2 553 210 8 2 343 92
2016 2 694 246 9 2 448 91
Source: [14], [15].
Thus, raw material goods with low value added, for instance, nonferrous metal ores, oil, different kinds of mill products and others, constantly remain compati-tive on the world market (see Fig. 1).
Figure 1.
Shared distribution of goods with constant level of competitiveness by HS commodity aggregates, %
1.8% n i~ 3.6%
1.8% -
1.8%
2
14
15
6
13
14
15
16
Note: 2 — natural products of plant origin; 4 — finished food products; alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages and vinegar; tobacco and its substitutes; 5 — mineral prod-
ucts; 6 — products of chemical and related industries; 13 — products made of stone, gypsum, cement, asbestos, mica or similar materials; ceramic products; glass and articles thereof; 14 — natural or cultured pearls, precious or semiprecious stones, precious metals, metals clad with precious metals, and articles thereof; bijouterie; coins; 15 — non-precious metals and articles thereof; 16 — machinery, equipment and machinery; electrotechnical equipment; their parts; sound recording and sound reproducing equipment, equipment for recording and reproducing television images and sound, their parts and accessories.
Source: Authors calculations.
The share of non-competitive goods is high. One of the reasons for the predominance of abovementioned constantly non-competitive commodity positions might be that these goods are exported in a small amount, which affects the competitiveness of the goods. It should be mentioned that the assortment of goods within this category is diverse and this group of goods should be researched in details for further development of the range and growth of export volumes (see Fig. 2).
Figure 2.
Shared distribution of uncompetitive goods by HS commodity aggregates, %
3.7%
0.2%___1.2% 2.3%^^^0.2%
1.5%
■ 1 2
■ 3 ■ 4
■ 5 6
■ 7 ■ 8
■ 9 ■ 10
■ 11 12
■ 13 ■ 14
■ 15 ■ 16
■ 17 18
■ 20 21
Note: 1 — live animals; products of animal origin; 2 — natural products of plant origin; 3 — fats and oils of animal or vegetable origin and products of their cleavage; ready-made edible fats; waxes of animal or vegetable origin; 4 — finished food products; alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages and vinegar; tobacco and its substitutes; 5 — mineral products; 6 — products of chemical and related industries; 7 — plastics and articles thereof; rubber, rubber and articles thereof; 8 — raw skins, leather, natural fur and articles thereof; saddlery and harness; travel accessories, ladies' bags and similar goods; products from the intestines of animals (except fiber from silkworm fibroin); 9 — wood and wood products; charcoal; cork and articles thereof; products made of straw, alfa or other plaiting materials; basket and other wickerwork; 10 — mass of wood or other fibrous cellulose materials; recycled paper or cardboard (waste paper and waste); paper, cardboard and articles thereof; 11 — textile materials and textiles; 12 — shoes, hats, umbrellas, sun umbrellas, walking sticks, walking sticks, whips, whips and parts thereof; treated feathers and articles thereof; artificial flowers; articles made of human hair; 13 — articles of stone, gypsum, shoes, hats, umbrellas, sun umbrellas, walking sticks, walking sticks, whips, whips and parts thereof; treated feathers and articles thereof; artificial flowers; articles made of human hair; 14 — natural or cultured pearls, precious or semiprecious stones, precious metals, metals clad with precious metals, and articles thereof; bijouterie; coins; 15 — non-precious metals and articles thereof; 16 — products of machinery and equipment; 17 — ground vehicles, aircraft, floating equipment and transport-related devices and equipment; 18 — instruments
and apparatuses optical, photographic, cinematographic, measuring, control, precision, medical or surgical; watches of all kinds; musical instruments; their parts and accessories; 20 — different manufactured goods; 21 — works of art, collectibles and antiques.
Source: Authors' calculations.
Furthermore, it is necessary to allocate a category «new goods» (in 2016), their share amounts to 6% of the total share of exports. Products, which were not exported from 2001 to 2016, were referred to this category of «new goods». Therefore, Kazakhstan began to supply new products such as «toilet linen and kitchen linen», «milk and cream with a fat content > 10%», «axes for electrical purposes and wheels and their parts for railway or tramway locomotives», «industrial robots», «o-acetylsalicylic acid, its salts and esters», «tannic vegetable origin extracts», and others (see Fig. 3).
Figure 3.
Shared distribution of new export of goods by HS commodity groups, %
1.4 ,-1.4
4.1
12.3
1.4 .
9,6
■
11 12
13 14
16 17
18 18
10 111
113 114
15 116 20
Note: 1 — live animals; products of animal origin; 2 — products of plant origin; 3 — fats and oils of animal or vegetable origin and products of their cleavage; ready-made edible fats; waxes of animal or vegetable origin; 4 — finished food products; alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages and vinegar; tobacco and its substitutes; 6 — products of chemical and related industries; 7 — plastics and articles thereof; rubber, rubber and articles thereof; 8 — raw skins, leather, natural fur and articles thereof; saddlery and harness; travel accessories, ladies' bags and similar goods; products from the intestines of animals (except fiber from silkworm fibroin); 10 — mass of wood or other fibrous cellulose materials; recycled paper or cardboard (waste paper and waste); paper, cardboard and articles thereof; 11 — textile materials and textiles; 13 — products made of stone, gypsum; 14 — natural pearls, 15 — non-precious metals and articles thereof; 16 — products of machinery and equipment; 20 — different manufactured goods.
Source: Authors' calculations.
15.1
Abovementioned goods have not been referred to competitive, but there is a potential for their development. Hence, new exporting trade positions may be characterized in whole as having a low level of competitiveness, which does not lead to a change in the overall level of Kazakh export competitiveness, but contributes to a structural change in the export basket. The curve of the number of competitive goods is top-down, which clearly reflects the reduction in the proportion of these goods.
Analysis of the access of Kazakh goods to the foreign market
Analysis of the access of Kazakh goods to foreign markets has shown the following problems. During 2009-2017 many countries around the world adopted 11,894 legal acts that engage with export and import operations [16]. Countries are reluctant to liberalize their trade relations. At the same time, countries such as China, Germany, Italy, Poland, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain, South Korea, Austria, and Finland appeared to be in the most beneficial position thanks to this direction of their state policy.
Provisions having discriminatory nature have affected industries such as metallurgy, engineering, electricity, electronics, food, cereals, oil and gas products and others, where countries including China, Germany, Italy, France, the United Kingdom, the United States and other states are more sensitive to these undertaken measures [16].
Countries have more likely been taking protectionist measures. The number of legal acts reached 8,653 measures in 2009-2017. During the recovery period following the global crisis the number of discriminatory measures increased from 2010 to 2013. This period is intertwined with the strengthening of anti-Russian |
and anti-European sanctions by all major players of the world market and, as a ~
result, is characterized by a decrease in the efficiency of national economies. ^
w
TS y
With regard to Kazakhstan, countries have adopted 1,035 direct and indirect af- & fected legal acts, of which 234 NRAs were essentially non-discriminatory and 781 had discriminatory nature. Among them at the current time only 55.45% of barriers have been functioning (see Fig. 4).
Figure 4.
Measures taken by countries in relation to the Republic of Kazakhstan during 2009-2017, legal acts
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Discriminative measure Non-discriminative measure Total
Source: [16].
Protectionist discriminatory measures make 69.7% of the total number of all identified political measures of other states against Kazakhstan, of which 17.5% are related to anti-dumping measures, 21.7% — to import tariffs,
9.2% — to financial grants, 5.9% — to state loans, and 6.4% — to governmental procurement. Among other measures of third countries, TBT and SPS actions, quantitative import restrictions, setting higher tariffs for imported goods, import banning and other methods, amounting to a total of 39.3%, could be emphasized (see Fig. 5).
Figure 5.
Discriminatory measures with respect to the Republic of Kazakhstan during 2009-2017, %
.70%
39.30%
17.50°%
5.90°%
9.20%
6.40%
■ import tariff
■ antidumping duty financial grants
I public procurement
■ state lease other measures
Source: [16].
This mainly affected products of metallurgy, mechanical engineering, electrical transformers, medicine, wheat etc. Along with that, the conducted calculations present that, according to the 4-digit structure (291 product discriptions or 9.55% of the total exports), export basket of the Republic of Kazakhstan faces various barriers. 14.7% of export sales account for each item (see Fig. 6).
Figure 6.
Production of Kazakhstan often subjected to discriminatory measures in foreign markets during 2009-2017, number of legal acts
314
75
29 25
22 21 21 19 19 19 12 18 16 16 16 15 15 15 13 15 6 14 14
Source: [16].
As a result, it can be revealed that in the area of trade partners from the EAEU and the WTO, direct or indirect export measures affecting particular Kazakh products
services for exports of competitor nations. The second group of measures is aimed at supporting domestic production. Such measures have been opted by countries such as Russia, China, and Uzbekistan. As a result of presented data, the following conclusions were drawn and appropriate recommendations were developed:
Measures that will lead to export increasing in Kazakhstan
• Anti-dumping measures against Ukrainian import of some nitrogen fertilizers from Russia, according to the decision of the Interdepartmental Commission on international trade, apply to the types of nitrogen fertilizers «3102 10 and 3102 80 00 00» for the period from May 18, 2017 to May 21, 2022 in the amount of 31.84%.
JSC «Kazakh Export» Export insurance company» along with the participation of Kazakh manufacturers of nitrogen fertilizers to negotiate with Ukrainian importers to increase the supply of Kazakh nitrogen fertilizers in exchange for Russian fertilizers.
• Decree of the Government of Uzbekistan No. 244 dated August 22, 2015 «On amendments and additions to the program of localization of production of ready-made products, spare parts and materials» in as much as implementation of Decree No. 2298 of February 11,2015, the purpose of which is to promote local production.
The Ministry for investments and development of Kazakhstan jointly with JSC «Kazakh Export» Export insurance company» is recommended to negotiate with the government of Uzbekistan about the possibility of Kazakh participation in projects within the Program of localization and production of finished products for the 2015-2019. To propose a project of joint investment industrial cooperation in the sphere of product analogues manufacturing which are included in Uzbek Project.
• Decree of the government of Ukraine No. 782 of October 26, 2016 to increase the volume of certain drugs (according to the Decree No. 544 dated May 27, 2015), which are exempt from VAT on import.
It is necessary for LLP «SK-Pharmaceuticals» in cooperation with JSC «Kazakh Export» Export insurance company» to engage in establishing export supplies to the Ukrainian market, as well as to establish supply chains cooperation through procurement of medicine within the statutory free medical assistance in Ukraine.
• On February 9, 2016, the decree of the Government of Tajikistan No. 64 was adopted, according to which metallurgical plant imported to Tajikistan, is exempt from VAT and duties on equipment that will be used for equipment.
The Ministry for investments and development of Kazakhstan in cooperation with JSC «Kazakh Export» Export insurance company» should hold talks with Tajikistan on the participation of Kazakh manufacturers in the project realization.
Measures that could potentially influence the export of Kazakhstan
• In China, on January 30, 2015, the General administration of customs issued Regulation No. 4 of 2015, which introduced a tax on the consumption of several imported goods. In accordance with the note, from January1,2016, for lead-acid batteries («85071000», «85072000»), the tax rate is 4%.
The Ministry of national economy of Kazakhstan should analyze the impact of this measure on the export of Kazakhstan.
• The new Customs code of Uzbekistan, approved in January 20, 2016 N0. ZRU-400, published the list of goods currently subject to mandatory examination.
The Ministry of national economy of Kazakhstan after consulting with JSC «National Center for Expertise and Certification» should analyze the impact of this measure on Kazakh exporters.
Conclusion
In the framework of the conducted study the following conclusions have been made.
The results of the intra-industry trade index demonstrate that Kazakhstan has mostly established intra-industry trade relations with countries that are not EAEU members. On the contrary, there is an inter-branch relationship with the EAEU member states, which prevails in the direction of increase.
It has been concluded that during consideration of advantageous aspects of integration processes and stimulating production cooperation, vertical intra-industry trade has occupied the main position.
The results of the export competitiveness assessment show that the export of Kazakhstan is characterized by a low level of competitiveness. The number of commodity items, which are consistently competitive, is insignificant, mainly it is products with a low value added. The export yield is provided by competitive goods.
It has been proved that new products positively influence the qualitative component of the export structure and there is a potential for their competitiveness on the external markets and, simultaneously, for increasing the yield of the export basket. Expanding the coverage of markets with products that have already proved their competitiveness on particular export markets may become a significant path for their further growth and export product range improvement.
The study revealed that the number of commodity items that are consistently competitive is insignificant. Due to the accepted value of RCA competitiveness indexes, the matching correspondence of the distribution of commodity items
were taken in the framework of this research for the further promotion of exports. It has been established that the main part of trade distortions that cause damage to Kazakhstan has been delivered by the EAEU countries (see Table 3).
Table 3.
Dynamics of the policy liberalization process of countries with regard to the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2009-2017, number of legal acts
Countries Measures 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
EAEU in respect of Kazakhstan Nondiscriminatory measures, % 10.5 5.3 20 36.4 25 33.3 11.6 16.3 16.7
Discriminatory measures, % 89.5 94.7 80 63.6 75% 66.7 88.4 83.7 83.3
All measures, PCs 19 19 5 11 36 36 43 43 6
Europe and Central Asia (52 countries) in respect of Kazakhstan Non- discriminatory measures, % 12.8 15.6 36.4 58.8 28.3 41.4 23.2 19.3 20
Discriminatory measures, % 87.2 84.4 63.6 41.2 71.7 58.6 76.8 80.7 80
All measures, PCs 39 32 22 34 53 58 69 57 10
Countries worldwide in respect of Kazakhstan Non- discriminatory measures, % 17.5 13.4 26.6 31 23.1 28.9 21.9 20 21.1
Discriminatory measures, % 82.5 86.6 73.4 69 76.9 71.1 78.1 80 78.9
All measures, PCs 137 112 94 100 143 135 151 120 19
Source: [16].
Building on the example of a number of goods, there have been measures taken by countries regarding Kazakhstan that have or potentially have a negative impact on the terms of access of exports of Kazakhstan to the markets of other countries. Some examples of various industry markets will be given. There will be an attempt to establish a link between the taken measures and the impact on a number of domestic industries. The considered liberalization and protectionist measures have been divided into the following categories:
• measures that could contribute to increase Kazakhstan's exports;
• measures that are likely to lead to a decline in Kazakhstan's exports.
Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Ukraine have opted for the first group of meas ures, consisting of tightening the requirements of licensing and import control, lending
in the category indicates the correctness of the conducted calculations. This may serve as a basis for further proposals to increase the level of competitiveness of domestic exports.
The main directions of increasing the level of competitiveness of domestic exports may include some measures differentiated in terms of competitiveness:
a) it is necessary to find opportunities for competitive products to expand their export geography through transit countries such as Uzbekistan, Armenia, Belarus, Russia, Mongolia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, and Azerbaijan;
b) for goods that lose competitive advantages and goods that have a variable growth trend, it is necessary to examine barriers to their promotion and evaluate the current condition of the industry, and, finally, to offer a number of measures to remove barriers in order to increase the competitiveness of exports.
These measures are aimed at facilitating export access and its deepening on the markets already accessed, especially paying attention to the countries on the transit route.
The conducted comparative analysis of the impact of mechanisms, measures and export barriers of manufactured goods in Kazakhstan provide an opportunity to make an assessment based on the WTO norms and proposals to eliminate these barriers. Analyzing the abovementioned, the following conclusions and recommendations may be drawn:
a) Kazakhstan's trade strategy should be reviewed. Special attention should be paid to unilateral governmental actions that restrict imports and artificially inflate exports where a violation of trade relations take place.
b) there is an issue of eliminating the negative consequences of taken measures. It is necessary to conduct a comprehensive assessment of these consequences on a regular basis; to monitor the subsidies introduced by the states-importers for the Kazakh producers of goods; and to tackle these problems at the WTO level. Along with this, separately from the barriers created by the EAEU member states, it is also necessary to solve them at the EEC level.
c) the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan needs to bring a proposal on Kazakhstan's participation in projects within the programs for localization of finished products manufacturing as well as cooperative projects for the localization of industrial production within the framework of the EAEU which would allow them to increase their production possibilities on foreign markets.
References
Journal of Business and Retail Management Research. 2017. Vol. 11, Issue 3, pp. 85-92.
[2] Казинформ Программа «30 корпоративных лидеров» — путь к превращению ведущих отечественных компаний в современные транснациональные корпорации [Electronic Resource] URL: <https://www. zakon.kz/97007-programma-30-korporativnykh-liderov-put.html>.
[3] Государственная Программа «Производительность — 2020»: утв. Постановлением Правительства Республики Казахстан 14 марта 2011 года, № 254.
[4] Постановление Правительства Республики Казахстан. Об утверждении Программы занятости 2020: утв. 31 марта 2011 года, № 316 (утратило силу постановлением Правительства Республики Казахстан от 19 июня 2013 года, № 636).
[5] Дорожная карта бизнеса 2020: утв. Постановлением Правительства Республики Казахстан 31 марта 2015 года, № 168.
[6] Постановление Правительства Республики Казахстан. О внесении изменений и дополнений в постановления Правительства Республики Казахстан от 25 мая 2012 года, № 683 «Об утверждении Программы развития моногородов на 2012-2020 годы» и от 15 ноября 2012 года, № 1449 «О некоторых вопросах реализации Программы развития моногородов на 2012-2020 годы»: утв. 7 ноября 2013 года, № 1169.
[7] Постановление Правительства Республики Казахстан. О внесении изменений и дополнений в постановление Правительства Республики Казахстан от 18 февраля 2013 года, № 151 «Об утверждении Программы по развитию агропромышленного комплекса в Республике Казахстан на 2013-2020 годы «Агробизнес-2020»: утв. 29 октября 2015 года, № 860.
[8] Указ Президента Республики Казахстан. О Стратегии индустриально-инновационного развития Республики Казахстан на 2003-2015 годы: утв. 17 мая 2003 года, № 1096 (утратил силу Указом Президента Республики Казахстан от 19 марта 2010 года, № 958).
[9] Государственная программа по форсированному индустриально-инновационному развитию Республики Казахстан на 2010-2014 гг. [Electronic Resource] URL: <http://kidi.gov.kz/analitika/programma-industrializatsii/2010-2014-gg> (accessed 30.07.2017).
[10] Государственная программа индустриально-инновационного развития Республики Казахстан на 2015-2019 годы: утв. Указом Президента Республики Казахстан 1 августа 2014 года, № 874.
[11] Мадиярова Д. Мировые товарные рынки. Алматы, 2005.
The International Trade Journal. 2012. Vol. 26, pp. 326-359.
globaltradealert.org/global_dynamics/flow_import> (accessed 10.11.2017). Амирбекова А. C., Кулбатыров Н. Н.1
Условия доступа казахстанских товаров на внешние рынки2
В статье рассмотрены возможности и ограничения роста экспорта Республики Казахстан в среднесрочной перспективе. Изучены и выбраны методы для определения количественных и качественных параметров экспорта, произведены расчеты показателей, характеризующих экспортный потенциал: оценка качества товара на основе сравнительных преимуществ — индекс Баласса, оценка экспортного потенциала продукции на основе доли экспорта во внутриотраслевой торговле — индекс Грубеля-Ллойда. Проведен сравнительный анализ объемов, механизмов, мер и барьеров, предпринимаемых в отношении экспорта промышленных товаров Казахстана, и внесены предложения по устранению данных барьеров.
1 Амирбекова Айнур Султаналиевна — кандидат наук, главный эксперт сектора промышленности и предпринимательства Центра развития торговой политики при Министерстве национальной экономики Республики Казахстан. E-mail: <[email protected]>;
Кулбатыров Нурлан Найзабекович — магистр, заместитель Генерального директора Центра развития торговой политики при Министерстве национальной экономики Республики Казахстан. E-mail: <[email protected]>.
2 Статья сдана в редакцию в январе 2018 г.
В работе доказано, что расширение охвата рынка продуктами, подтвердившими свою конкурентоспособность на некоторых экспортных рынках, может стать существенным каналом для дальнейшего роста и усовершенствования ассортимента экспорта. В свете принятой Национальной экспортной стратегии в работе систематизированы меры и рекомендации по совершенствованию экспортной политики, которые могут способствовать ускорению экономического роста и дальнейшему развитию внешнеэкономической деятельности Казахстана как фактора более глубокой интеграции в мировую экономику.
Ключевые слова: конкурентоспособность экспорта, индекс Баласса, внутриотраслевая торговля, нетарифные барьеры, индекс Грубеля-Ллойда, Всемирная торговая организация, Евразийский экономический союз.
¡БЬ: ¥13
