Дрыночкин А.В.
Eastern Europa as a new element of the global market system
There are a lot of definitions of «globalization», almost each of them is based on different starting positions.
There exist several fundamental approaches:
culturelogical, which considers globalization in the broad civilizational aspect;
economic, defining globalization in the context of global markets of goods, services, capitals and labour;
ecological, connecting globalization with environmental deterioration;
praxeological, focusing on active actions in different spheres of human activity, including struggle with global poverty and international criminality;
others, about which I have little information, but that surely exist.
Of course, inside each approach there exist a lot of different points of view. Consensus in this matter is hardly possible. As for me, I consider globalization as a process of purposeful formation of markets and their integration into single global network.
It allow us to speak about the system of global markets, with its own structure, hierarchy and mechanism of functioning.
And transforming countries try to find a proper place in this system.
But now we are watching some new features of globalization.
It seems to me, that the polemics on essence, genesis, forms and perspectives of globalization, which was quite heated a few years ago, gradually has come to naught.
On the one hand, due to a sudden (drastic) slowing down of globalization, and its tirning into daily routine, the results of which are successfully used even by the most inveterate antiglobalists. The speed of globalization became very slow, mostly because it's very difficult to form new markets.
On the other hand, globalization has resulted in increasing instability of world markets. This why public interest is shifting near and near to the working out of effective activity strategys in the globalized world.
These strategys can be divided into two major types: strategy of influence and strategy of adaptation
= strategys of influence are the attempts aimed at strengthening of world economy regulation. The solution of this problem has not been made yet, because there are too many objects, requiring control.
= strategys of adaptation are more passive.
Maybe, one of this strategys is the process of regionization, manifesting in intensive development of economic relations in the framework of large regions. The formal demonstration of this process is the appearance and strengthening of regional economic structures, aimed at institutionalization of flexible system of relations between numerous economic agents.
Meanwhile, the rapid growth of number of integrating unions in the world can be viewed in two ways: as natural process, and as artificial process.
Natural way of formation of integrated union connected with the long historical period of development of the region, as a result of which appear relatively all-sufficient economic system.
Artificial process appear like an imitation to the first, like an attempt to realize the results of science research, received jn the basis of study first kinds of regions, like consequence of absolutization of the international division of labour' principle (which have some restrictions).
Following this context, we can ask: if Eastern Europe is a separate region?
We can answer this question again in two ways: using formal approach and essential.
Formal approach means, that it's necessary to find such term, which would just junify 15 countries, representing common geographical zone. Maybe its time to include Greece in this region.
Essential approach implies availability of any characteristics, suitable for all these countries: religios, linguistic, civilizational, ideological, economic, political etc.
Its very difficult to find common features as all 15 countries are different. Of course there are some subregions, which meet these requirements: Baltic states (or East-Baltic states – including Poland), Balkan states (possibly West-Balkan and East-Balkan), Visegrad group, and so on.
Thus, Eastern Europe is more an artificial structure, then real.
But in the framework of «EE» a new configuratuin is appearing. I mean EU New Members.
Are they integrating into common european economy? Judging by the foreign trade dinamics, mostly reflecting the real production processes, we most lirely have to admit it: their share in the EU intra-trade flows is increasing (see the table № 1).
Table № 1
CZ / EST / LAT / LIT / HUN / POL / SLK / SLO / N.M. / EU / %Export to EU (bl euro)
2003 / 37,2 / 3,3 / 2,0 / 3,8 / 30,9 / 38,4 / 16,3 / 7,6 / 139,5 / 1 878,5 / 7,4
2004 / 47,7 / 3,8 / 2,5 / 5,0 / 35,5 / 47,7 / 18,8 / 8,7 / 169,7 / 2 028,3 / 8,4
2005 / 53,3 / 4,8 / 3,1 / 6,2 / 38,3 / 55,5 / 21,9 / 10,2 / 193,3 / 2 144,2 / 9,0
Import from EU (bl euro)
2003 / 32,5 / 3,7 / 3,5 / 4,8 / 26,7 / 41,7 / 14,7 / 9,3 / 136,9 / 1 781,2 / 7,7
2004 / 45,0 / 4,9 / 4,3 / 6,3 / 32,6 / 53,9 / 18,7 / 11,6 / 177,3 / 1 950,4 / 9,1
2005 / 50,3 / 6,1 / 5,2 / 7,3 / 35,8 / 60,6 / 22,4 / 12,7 / 200,4 / 2 065,8 / 9,7
But these figures don't explain us, why this growth is happening.
In this case three answers are possible:
new members are increasing the volumes of mutual deliveries, thereby separating from old members
vice verse, the volume of deliveries to old members is growing, at the same time intra-regional relations are paid less attentuon
third variant combines the two above-mentioned ones.
To choose the right answer, let's see the table, which reflects the data on the share of the EU-New-Members in the EU-Trade of EU-New-Members (see the table № 2). In calculating the amount of EU-NM deliveries to all EU-Members was taken for 100%, and then the share of EU-NM was calculated.
Table № 2
2004 / 2005 / 2004 / 2005EXPORT / IMPORT
LAT / 33,3 / 36,8 / 38,4 / 41,8
LIT / 32,4 / 34,9 / 28,9 / 30,5
SLK / 28,6 / 32,1 / 34,9 / 37,3
EST / 22,7 / 22,5 / 20,7 / 22,0
CZ / 19,5 / 21,3 / 15,9 / 17,7
POL / 14,5 / 15,7 / 11,7 / 12,4
SLO / 14,2 / 13,9 / 9,9 / 11,2
HUN / 11,1 / 14,3 / 13,7 / 14,5
In my opinion, the results are very interesting: it is evident, that the NM are more likely to deepen the intra-regional contacts, then to strengphen the trade relations with the old members. Perhaps, it contradicts the widely spread postulate, that EU-NM are actively integrating to the west-european kernel. Yes, it's true, but we can see the outlines of another process.
What is the main feature of this process = I don't know! Maybe it's the beginning of forming of the new real region in Europe? Maybe it's just a reflection of TNC's activity? Maybe something else?
But in any case this subject requares further research.