<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Amber Bridge Fund &#187; Industry</title>
	<atom:link href="http://en.abfund.org/?feed=rss2&#038;tag=industry" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://en.abfund.org</link>
	<description>Amber-Bidge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2016 21:48:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-EN</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.40</generator>
	<item>
		<title>The Coastal Factor In The Socio-Economic Development Of A Territory (Based on the example of Kingisepp District of  Leningrad Oblast)</title>
		<link>http://en.abfund.org/?p=1096</link>
		<comments>http://en.abfund.org/?p=1096#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:14:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Amber Bridge. Journal of Regional Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[№3 (6) 2015]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coastal Zone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kingisepp Region]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leningrad Oblast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litoral Development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maritime ports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport & Logistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://en.abfund.org/?p=1096</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Druzhinin Alexandr Georgievich — Doctor of Geography, Professor, Director of the Northern-Caucasian Research Institute of Economic and Social Problems of the South Federal University. Lachininskii Stanislav Sergeevich — PhD in Geography, Research Fellow at the Laboratory of Comprehensive Studies of the Spatial Development of the regions, Institute of Problems of Regional Economics of the RAS; [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="page" title="Page 15">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<div class="page" title="Page 30">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<p><strong><span style="color: #4c4c4c;">Druzhinin Alexandr Georgievich — </span><span style="color: #4c4c4c;">Doctor of Geography, Professor, Director of the Northern-Caucasian Research Institute of Economic and Social Problems of the South Federal University.</span></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #4c4c4c;">Lachininskii Stanislav Sergeevich </span></strong><span style="color: #4c4c4c;"><strong>— PhD in Geography, Research Fellow at the Laboratory of Comprehensive Studies of the Spatial Development of the regions, Institute of Problems of Regional Economics of the RAS; Assistant Professor of the Department of Economic and Social Geography, Saint-Petersburg State University</strong>. </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p><span style="font-style: italic; color: #333333;">This article was prepared based on the materials of the expedition studies in the framework of research grants of the Russian Scientific Foundation (#15- 18-10000) and the Russian Humanitarian Scientific Foundation (#15-02- 00002). </span></p>
<p><span style="font-style: italic; color: #333333;">The aim of the study was to identify the role of the coastal factor and the location factor in the transformation of the socio-economic system of Kingisepp District.<br />
The scientific and practical significance of the proposed research concerns synthesis of analytical, statistical, expert estimates and projections, as well as consideration of the position of the local authorities, views of major economic players and port operators. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-style: italic; color: #333333;">The study aims to contribute to the regional economy and social geography, united by a common geospatial paradigm. Russian scientific literature provides little research performed on the level of municipal districts, which greatly decreases our understanding of the socio-economic processes in the field. Kingisepp district of Leningrad Oblast is a unique area that combines several important spatial characteristics — «cross-border-ness», «seaside-ness», and «periphery-ness». The seaside part of the region (which has 114 km of the sea coastline) has gained a powerful impetus to its formation due to implementation of the project of the Ust-Luga sea port. This sea port </span>continues to increase its influence not only on the surrounding areas, but also on the whole historical main area of economic and residential development of the municipality (along the axis of «Ivangorod — Kingisepp»). This became possible due to improvement of road and transport infrastructure, outlooks for development of industrial zones, housing development, and due to an increase in labour “push-pull” migration. The article describes the most important aspects of the transformation of the socio-economic system in the context of marine economic activities that correspond to the port development.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Introduction</strong></p>
<p>&#8220;The shift to the sea&#8221; of the economy, population and infrastructure is a fundamental, universally manifested trend of the territorial organization of the modern society. Marine economic activities are based on the powerful economic potential of the world’s oceans (according to the most conservative estimates, the value of their resources totals 24 trillion USD [1]), and correspond to globalization (it is symptomatic that 90% of international trade is carried out through seaports [2]). In this regard, in the scientific literature there have been cultivated for decades notions of the economic and social specificity of coastal regions, of the &#8220;coastal zones&#8221; as specific socio-geographical phenomena; attempts have been made to identify and delimitate them. At the same time, formal geospatial criteria for a &#8220;coastal zone&#8221; (a direct &#8220;access&#8221; of a territorial socio-economic taxon, merged by this coastal zone, to the coast, as well as a small, usually in the range of 50 to 200 km distance from the coastline [3-9]), as we believe, should always be complemented by the actual impact of the “coastal factor” on the territorial socio-economic dynamics, and by recognition of the determination of the coastal zone (including its spatial scope and contours) specifically by its marine economic activities (including development of modern port, logistics and industrial complexes [10, p.55]).</p>
<p>A striking example of the renovation of the coastal zone, its &#8220;compressing&#8221; and &#8220;expansion&#8221; (as well as the overall &#8220;coastal factor&#8221; in the social and economic development), is Kingisepp District of Leningrad Oblast. Here, a major project of the Ust-Luga sea port has been successfully implemented for already more than two decades. With the growth of the port and industrial activity and developing of the necessary infrastructure, it provides an increasing impact on theeconomic and residential architectonics of the territory.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>The port of Ust-Luga as the &#8220;pole&#8221; of the socio-economic activity in water and on land</strong></p>
<p>Construction of the sea port of Ust-Luga is carried out in accordance with the decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated April 28, 1993 #728-r with the aim to create powerful, high-performance complexes for handling bulk to large vessels with the carrying capacity of over 30 thousand tonnes. The port was kind of an &#8220;answer&#8221; of Russia to the growing geopolitical and geo-economic risks from transit countries (first of all, from the Baltic States). At the same time its construction was a logical step in the development of the north-west (Baltic) transport communication corridor of Russia and in the reconstruction (expansion on a new site) of the Saint-Petersburg sea transport hub.</p>
<p>Unlike the old sea ports – Saint-Petersburg, Novorossiysk, Rotterdam, Antwerp, Hamburg, Le Havre and others, Ust-Luga was originally designed as «greenfield». This means that it was designed as a new project from scratch in a new place, which determines not only its high-tech capabilities, but also opportunities for further expansion of transport and logistics activities and, which is even more important (also due to the potential impact on the surrounding areas), opportunities for the development of the port industry. This project is a good example of the successful practical implementation of the Russian geo-economic strategy by the State and its business in the very complicated geo-economic, economic, financial and institutional conditions. German researcher Hans Kundnani, when discussing such behavior of states (in his studies &#8211; Germany), interprets it as a &#8220;geoeconomically active state using its geoeconomic power&#8221; [11].</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Figure 1</p>
<p><strong>Turnover growth dynamics, </strong><strong>2003-2014</strong><strong> (tonnes) </strong></p>
<p>Compiled based on [12]</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Currently, the port of Ust-Luga (with a turnover of 75.7 million tonnes in 2014 &#8211; Fig. 1) is the largest port not only in the region (to put this in perspective, the port of Saint Petersburg has a turnover of about 58 million tonnes, oil loading port Primorsk &#8211; up to 75 million tonnes), but also in the entire Baltic Sea, being second in the whole country only to the sea port of Novorossiysk. Developing on a single site, the port of Ust-Luga is in fact an established transportation and logistics cluster, uniting 15 independent terminals:</p>
<ol>
<li><em>&#8220;Rosterminalugol&#8221;</em> <em>JSC</em> (employing 308 people; overload of Kuzbass coal for export with the design capacity of 4 million tonnes of coal per year; by August 2015 it has handled almost 10 million tonnes);</li>
<li><em>&#8220;Universal Handling Facility&#8221;</em> <em>LLC</em> (design capacity &#8211; 3 million tonnes; the terminal specializes in receiving, storage and shipment for export (import) of general and bulk cargo, including &#8211; cast iron ingots, coal, nonferrous metals, bulk goods);</li>
<li><em>&#8220;European sulfur terminal&#8221;</em> <em>JSC</em> (design capacity &#8211; 9 million tonnes per year; sulfur comes by rail from Orenburg and Astrakhan);</li>
<li><em>&#8220;Baltic</em><em> fertilizer terminal&#8221; LLC</em>(Transshipment of general cargo and fertilizers with the capacity of over 5 million tonnes);</li>
<li><em>&#8220;</em><em>Ust-Luga Oil&#8221; JSC</em> (employing 600 people; the design capacity &#8211; 30 million tonnes of oil products per year, of which 20 million tonnes &#8211; dark oil products and 10 million tonnes &#8211; light petroleum products; the tank farm provides storage for 960000 m<sup>3</sup> of petroleum products; the terminal performs transshipment of oil products from companies of the following cities and towns: Kirishi, Yaroslavl, Surgut, Ryazan, Nizhnevartovsk, Orenburg, Saratov, Samara, Syzran, Achinsk, Kazan and Pavlodar);</li>
<li><em>&#8220;</em><em>Spetsmornefteport&#8221; LLC</em> (LLC &#8220;Transneft &#8211; Port of Ust-Luga&#8221; is focused on receiving of oil from the main oil pipeline, storage and shipping of oil into tankers in the interest of oil companies of the Russian Federation and is aimed at ensuring a continuous process of transfer of oil for export; the tank farm of Ust-Luga is an endpoint of the &#8220;Baltic Pipeline System &#8211; 2&#8243; (BPS-2));</li>
<li>        <em>&#8220;Neva</em><em> Pipeline Company&#8221; LLC</em> (provides handling of up to 30 million tonnes of Russian oil for export);</li>
</ol>
<p>8.         <em>&#8220;Commercial sea port </em><em>Ust-Luga&#8221; JSC</em> (Multipurpose Transshipment Complex MTC Yug-2 is designed to handle a wide range of goods: new imported cars, large rolling machinery, containers, project and general cargos, including military equipment for export; shipment of cars from the terminal is carried out by car and rail);</p>
<p>9.         <em>North-</em><em>Western Basin Branch</em> of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise &#8220;Rosmorport&#8221; (servicing terminal for the port activity);</p>
<ol>
<li>      <em>&#8220;</em><em>Ust-</em><em>Luga Container Terminal&#8221; JSC</em> (the first deep-water container terminal in north-west Russia; with its full development it will become the largest and most technologically advanced Russian terminal with a depth of up to 16 m at berth and a carrying capacity of 2.6 million TEU per year; currently the volume of transshipment totals 440 thousand TEU[1]);</li>
<li><em>&#8220;Sibur-Portenergo&#8221; LLC</em> (subsidiary of &#8220;SIBUR Holding&#8221; JSC, managing a complex for transshipment of up to 1.5 million tonnes of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) per year and up to 2.5 million tonnes of light oil products per year in the commercial sea port of Ust-Luga);</li>
<li><em>&#8220;NOVATEK Ust-Luga&#8221; LLC</em> (complex for fractionation and transshipment of stable gas condensate; enables processing of stable gas condensate in the light and heavy naphtha, kerosene, diesel fractions and fuel oil, and shipping of finished products for export by sea; capacity of the complex is 6 million tonnes of raw materials per year);</li>
</ol>
<p>13.       <em>Forest</em><em> Terminal &#8220;Factor&#8221; JSC</em> (has a timber transshipment capacity of about 290 thousand m<sup>3</sup>/tonnes with the prospect of handling pallets up to 400 thousand tonnes per year);</p>
<ol start="4">
<li>      <em>&#8220;Terminal New Haven</em><em>&#8221; LLC</em> (the terminal is designed to receive Ro-Ro and general cargos; the terminal capacity allows storage of up to 10,000 cars at the same time with the ability of loading up to 240 car haulers per day);</li>
</ol>
<p>15.       <em>&#8220;</em><em>SmartBalk Terminal&#8221; LLC</em> (a joint venture of &#8220;FosAgro&#8221; JSC and &#8220;Ultramar&#8221; LLC, stevedoring and terminal service company for transshipment of mineral fertilizers in the port of Ust-Luga. The freight turnover is 3 million tonnes of phosphate fertilizers per year).</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Additionally, the &#8220;Baltic ferry&#8221; project has been launched in Ust-Luga. This is a railway-car ferry line Ust-Luga &#8211; Baltiysk &#8211; Sassnitz (Germany). It is important to emphasize that this ferry crossing, while providing stable sea links with the Kaliningrad Region, also becomes the basis for the development of the cross-border transport and logistics cluster on the shores of the Baltic Sea, which is very important for Russia. In particular, at a meeting of the Governor of the Leningrad Region A. Drozdenko with the Head of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania E. Sellering in June 2015 it was decided to set up a logistics center in the port of Sassnitz-Mukran (Germany).</p>
<p>Currently, there are three vessels operating on the ferry line Ust-Luga &#8211; Baltiysk &#8211; Ust-Luga. They are owned by subsidiaries of the Russian Railways and make 7-8 voyages per month. Over the entire period of the functioning of the ferry line Ust-Luga &#8211; Sassnitz there have been transported about 254 thousand tonnes of cargo, including 861 units of vehicles and 4171 carriages. According to experts [13], in the next 15 years many countries, including France, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and Austria, will become interested in this ferry crossing, as already now there is reciprocal cargo traffic with Russia with the volume of about 20 million tonnes.</p>
<p>With the growth of its transport and logistics potential, the port of Ust-Luga is becoming an increasingly attractive platform for the implementation of major industrial projects. First of all, this involves localization of the gas- and petrochemical cluster in the port area with further intensification of specialization and cooperation and with the growth of the added value of products. It is significant that this is not for the first time that petrochemical and gas chemical industry becomes the driver of a port and industrial complex. For example, Houston (USA) is one of the largest manufacturing centers in the world for petrochemical industry. Houston has more than 3,700 organizations working in petrochemistry, as well as 9 refineries, processing 2.3 million barrels. In total, Houston has 719 enterprises producing chemicals and plastics [14].</p>
<p>The decision of &#8220;Gazprom&#8221; JSC to build the &#8220;Baltic LNG plant&#8221; is strategically important for the creation of the gas and petrochemical cluster. The project has been preliminarily approved in the following format: two lines of 5 million tonnes of LNG per year each with a possibility to build a third one. The in-service date of both lines is the fourth quarter of 2020. The volume of investments was estimated at 10 billion USD. Gazprom&#8217;s partners can become the Anglo-Dutch «Shell» or Japanese «Mitsui», «Mitsubishi», «JGC Corporation», which possess the necessary licenses and gas liquefaction technologies. All of them are already involved in Russian LNG projects. A strategic partner will get a share of up to 49%. The plant will be located in Ust-Luga, which will require a gas pipeline of 360 km from Volkhov with the capacity of 25 billion m<sup>3</sup>. It is expected that the construction phase will provide about 4,000 job vacancies [15].</p>
<p>As part of the development of the industrial zone &#8220;Ust-Luga&#8221;, there has started development of the project for production of ammonia and carbamide &#8211; &#8220;Baltic carbamide plant&#8221; LLC (near the village of Vistino) of the group of companies &#8220;East&#8221; with the capacity of more than 1 million tonnes of carbamide. The estimated volume of investments exceeds 1.5 billion USD. The construction of the plant will create 780 jobs in the area. To implement this project, the company rents an area of 160 hectares in the eastern part of the industrial zone &#8220;Ust-Luga&#8221;. The future plant of the “East” group for production of granulated carbamide will be located here. Thesiteareawillbeabout 55 hectares. The project also involves creation of a sea terminal with the length of the quay wall of 300 meters and a depth of 16 m (the transport corridor from the plant is 8 km). If necessary, it will also involve construction of its own branch of a gas offtake from the existing gas pipeline &#8220;Kohtla-Järve &#8211; Leningrad&#8221;, the reconstruction of which is incorporated in the plans of &#8220;Gazprom&#8221;. The terminal complex and a carbamide plant will be connected by a corridor of communications [16]. An ammonia plant for 700 thousand tonnes,ownedby&#8221;EvroChim&#8221; JSC,should become an important part of the port and industrial complex.</p>
<p>The already built and planned port terminals, as well as production capacities near the port designed for construction are a strong &#8220;pole&#8221; of the localized marine economic activity. Thus, they foster renovation of the coastal zone, expanding the impact of the “coastal factor” virtually over the entire territory of Kingisepp District, which becomes, in this regard, not only formally, but also actually (structurally, due to the configuration of centers and flows) a coastal area.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>The main</strong><strong> local socio-economic effects of the “compressing” and “expansion” of the coastal zone </strong></p>
<p>The variety of regions and territories determines various models of social and economic development. Situation factors significantly adjust such development and expand the &#8220;corridor&#8221; of opportunities. At the same time, the economic, geographical and geo-economic situation is no longer a &#8220;destiny&#8221;: it can and must be adjusted (for more details please refer to [17]). The near-border and seaside location can change most successfully, primarily due to the development of cross-border infrastructure (including international automobile border-crossing points, warehouse and logistics infrastructure, commercial areas), as well as port and industrial facilities.</p>
<p>As O.A. Kuznetsova rightly notices, &#8220;an economic and geographic position can be assessed as favorable in case of vicinity to major economic centers and large sales markets; in case of a seaside location (maritime transport remains the cheapest, therefore sea ports are actively developing due to the port activity itself as well as due to production facilities associated with imported components and/or delivery of products for export); in case of a near-border location in proximity to economically developed countries (which become sources of investments) [18, p. 128]. It is also worth referring to the opinion of S.S. Artobolevsky, who notes that in modern Russia &#8220;one can distinguish three types of areas of growth, formed under the influence of globalization, agglomeration and resource factors: the largest urban agglomerations; export and resource regions; port near-border regions on the main routes of foreign trade &#8220;([19], p. 82). Indeed, the territory under investigation falls under the strong influence of Saint-Petersburg; the western part of the area, along with the district center, is part of the Greater Saint-Petersburg (with a population of about 6.5 million people). In addition, the near-border position provides promising opportunities for the development of global economic cooperation. However, under the current circumstances of the sanctions confrontation, many near-border and bilateral projects with Estonia and the EU in general have been frozen. In this situation, the use of the potential of the seaside position, in the first place for its port and economic and port and industrial activities, is undoubtedly a dominant factor in the development of Kingisepp District.</p>
<p>With the focus on Kingisepp District, it should be emphasized that the development of the port of Ust-Luga was accompanied by multidimensional impact on the entire local social and economic system. Just during the period of 2012-2014, the volume of goods and services, produced on the territory of the district, almost tripled. The unemployment rate is steadily declining and now is less than 1%. The average salary in the district in 2014 was 39,500 RUR &#8211; this holds the fourth place among the municipalities of the Leningrad Region [20]. To put this into perspective, the average monthly wage in the district in 2010 increased by 19% and nominally amounted to 27,701 RUR in 2011 [21]. At the same time, in 2014,the average monthly wageof employees in largeand medium-sizeprocessing industries on the territory of the districtcompared to 2013increased by10.0%, reaching 40,979 RUR. In largeand medium-sizeenterprises ofall forms of ownership the wage growthwas 8.4%; the average monthly wagefor2014 is 40,564 RUR. Wagesabove averagein Kingisepp District are found in organizationsinvolved in construction(139.7% compared to the average level forthe district) and in transport and communications services(157.7%) [20-21].</p>
<p>The most striking positive social and economic situation in the district is reflected by its considerable migration attractiveness (Table 1).</p>
<p>Table 1</p>
<p><strong>Population migration in Kingisepp District and in certain areas of Leningrad Oblast (2011-2014) *</strong></p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="105">District</td>
<td width="78">District population in 2011 (thousand people)</td>
<td width="73">Indicator (people)</td>
<td width="63">2011</td>
<td width="63">2012</td>
<td width="60">2013</td>
<td width="60">2014</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" width="105">Lomonosov District</td>
<td rowspan="3" width="78">64689</td>
<td width="73">Arrived</td>
<td width="63">1398</td>
<td width="63">1924</td>
<td width="60">2658</td>
<td width="60">2480</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Left</td>
<td width="63">1230</td>
<td width="63">1803</td>
<td width="60">2196</td>
<td width="60">2621</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Change</td>
<td width="63">168</td>
<td width="63">121</td>
<td width="60">462</td>
<td width="60">-141</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" width="105">Luzhsky District</td>
<td rowspan="3" width="78">78284</td>
<td width="73">Arrived</td>
<td width="63">2264</td>
<td width="63">2791</td>
<td width="60">2761</td>
<td width="60">3139</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Left</td>
<td width="63">1771</td>
<td width="63">2547</td>
<td width="60">2925</td>
<td width="60">2658</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Change</td>
<td width="63">493</td>
<td width="63">244</td>
<td width="60">-164</td>
<td width="60">481</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" width="105">Kingisepp District</td>
<td rowspan="3" width="78">78329</td>
<td width="73">Arrived</td>
<td width="63">2808</td>
<td width="63">3032</td>
<td width="60">3574</td>
<td width="60">3746</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Left</td>
<td width="63">1446</td>
<td width="63">2471</td>
<td width="60">2705</td>
<td width="60">3405</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Change</td>
<td width="63">1362</td>
<td width="63">561</td>
<td width="60">869</td>
<td width="60">341</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" width="105">Tosnensky District</td>
<td rowspan="3" width="78">123188</td>
<td width="73">Arrived</td>
<td width="63">6023</td>
<td width="63">7758</td>
<td width="60">7825</td>
<td width="60">8359</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Left</td>
<td width="63">2307</td>
<td width="63">3795</td>
<td width="60">5432</td>
<td width="60">6594</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Change</td>
<td width="63">3716</td>
<td width="63">3963</td>
<td width="60">2393</td>
<td width="60">1765</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" width="105">Gatchinsky District</td>
<td rowspan="3" width="78">233682</td>
<td width="73">Arrived</td>
<td width="63">9589</td>
<td width="63">11933</td>
<td width="60">12660</td>
<td width="60">13236</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Left</td>
<td width="63">4280</td>
<td width="63">6823</td>
<td width="60">8516</td>
<td width="60">10021</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Change</td>
<td width="63">5309</td>
<td width="63">5110</td>
<td width="60">4144</td>
<td width="60">3215</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" width="105">Vsevolozhsky District</td>
<td rowspan="3" width="78">261145</td>
<td width="73">Arrived</td>
<td width="63">11244</td>
<td width="63">16911</td>
<td width="60">21627</td>
<td width="60">25072</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Left</td>
<td width="63">4855</td>
<td width="63">8002</td>
<td width="60">9619</td>
<td width="60">13406</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="73">Change</td>
<td width="63">6389</td>
<td width="63">8909</td>
<td width="60">12008</td>
<td width="60">11666</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>*Compiled based on [22]</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>Kingisepp District is a part of the so-called “belt” of four districts, located to the south of Saint-Petersburg (Fig. 2), which is characterized not only by a significant migration increase, but also by large-scale modernization of the basic infrastructure [20-22].</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Figure 2</strong></p>
<p>Compiled based on [22]</p>
<p>(Награфике):</p>
<p><strong>Structure of the migration balance in Leningrad Oblast in 2013</strong></p>
<p>Vyborgsky District</p>
<p>Priozersky District</p>
<p>Vsevolozhsky District</p>
<p>Kingisepp District</p>
<p>Slanzevsky District</p>
<p>Luzhsky District</p>
<p>Volosovsky District</p>
<p>Sosnovy Bor</p>
<p>Lomonosovsky District</p>
<p>Gatchinsky District</p>
<p>Tosnensky District</p>
<p>Kirovsky District</p>
<p>Kirishsky District</p>
<p>Volkhovsky District</p>
<p>Tikhvinsky District</p>
<p>Boksitogorsky District</p>
<p>Lodeinopolsky District</p>
<p>Podporozhsky District</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>General migration balance</strong></p>
<p><strong>Migration structure</strong> of Kingisepp District:</p>
<p>International</p>
<p>Interregional</p>
<p>Intraregional</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Therefore, influence of the port is most significantly reflected in social indicators of the development of the territory: unemployment rate, wages (especially in construction and transport), positive migration balance. However, it should be noted that the port turnover, which has substantially increased in recent years, still poorly corresponds with the general demographic and economic characteristics of Kingisepp District, which is quite noticeable when compared to some foreign “near-port” territories (Table 2).</p>
<p>Table 2</p>
<p><strong>Social and economic potential of Kingisepp district compared to some similar territories*</strong></p>
<table width="497">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="98">Territory</td>
<td width="71">Population, people, 2015</td>
<td width="64">Area, km<sup>2</sup></td>
<td width="71">Population density, person per km<sup>2</sup></td>
<td width="57">GDP per person (euro)</td>
<td width="50">GRP, mln euro, 2012</td>
<td width="88">Main port</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="98">Kingisepp District (Russian Federation)</td>
<td width="71">79647</td>
<td width="64">2907</td>
<td width="71">27,20</td>
<td width="57">7423</td>
<td width="50">810</td>
<td width="88">Ust-Luga(78 mln tonnes)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="98">Kymenlaakso (Finland)</td>
<td width="71">180900</td>
<td width="64">5148</td>
<td width="71">35,24</td>
<td width="57">32095</td>
<td width="50">5806</td>
<td width="88">Kotka-Hamina (13,41 mln tonnes)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="98">Ostvorpommern (Germany)</td>
<td width="71">105036</td>
<td width="64">1899</td>
<td width="71">55,00</td>
<td width="57">16975</td>
<td width="50">1783</td>
<td width="88">Rostock(21,1 mln tonnes)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="98">Klaipeda District (Lithuania)</td>
<td width="71">333000</td>
<td width="64">5209</td>
<td width="71">63,93</td>
<td width="57">12613</td>
<td width="50">4200</td>
<td width="88">Klaipeda(35,2 mln tonnes)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="98">Kurzeme (Latvia)</td>
<td width="71">301621</td>
<td width="64">13596</td>
<td width="71">22,20</td>
<td width="57">6153</td>
<td width="50">1856</td>
<td width="88">Ventspils(30,4 mln tonnes)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>* compiled by the authors based on [12, 23]</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>The “coastal factor”, implemented due to the development of the port, also impacted the basic center-peripheral architecture of the territory. The emergence of a new &#8220;point&#8221; of the social and economic growth in the ex-periphery of the municipality (degradation of fisheries, as well as border and environmental constraints, complemented by a lack of transport and other infrastructure, which was overcome only due to the construction of the port, secured such a status for coastal areas) determined the socioeconomic bipolarity of the area. Meanwhile, its traditional center (Kingisepp) became increasingly involved in ensuring implementation of the transport and logistics Ust-Luga project, acquiring features of a &#8220;coastal&#8221; settlement.</p>
<p>It is indicative that at an early stage of the development of the transport and logistics project it was believed that it is the seaside village of Ust-Luga that in the long run will become the economic center of the area and will draw investment and human resources from Kingisepp. Such a vision was partly caused by the partial degradation of the town-forming basis of the district center (its largest enterprise &#8220;Phosphorit&#8221; was downsized), which occurred in 2003-2008.</p>
<p>However, as Kingisepp was integrating into an expanding coastal zone, it managed to keep its position. The fact is that the port of Ust-Luga currently employs 3500 &#8211; 4000 people; at the same time, there are no more than 3000 people living in the nearest village of the same name (according to the situation in 2015). The vast majority of those employed in the port, in the end, is settled primarily in the district center, where there has been extensive residential construction in the recent years (Residential Complex &#8220;Karat&#8221;, Residential Complex &#8220;Yamburg-City&#8221;, Residential Complex &#8220;Yamburg&#8221;, Residential Complex &#8220;Prestige&#8221;, residence on Krikkovskoe shosse, microdistrict #6). It is also symptomatic that the district, by the volume of retail space, exceeds the standards already by 4 times. It is exactly Kingisepp where large national retailers come to open their stores.</p>
<p>The settlement of Ust-Luga (located only 12 km away from the port terminals) has also a town-planning perspective. Despite a persisting lack of infrastructure (problems with water supply, gas supply, sewage systems, lack of modern socio-cultural and shopping facilities, etc.), construction of modern residential areas is under way. Such residential areas are designed primarily for port workers.</p>
<p>Implementation of the largest transport and logistics project and an adopted strategy for the development of the port industry have more clearly highlighted the general shortage of land resources (typical of the area with its large surface of wetlands), as well as a conflict of interest among various alternative directions of land use (industrial, transport and storage, residential, agricultural, recreational, and environmental).</p>
<p>Construction of the port of Ust-Luga caused significant imbalances on the local labor market, highlighted a lack of the necessary human capacity (including specialists specifically for work in the port &#8211; dock workers, repairmen, installers, riggers, etc.). Currently, Kingisepp District has about 1500 job vacancies (about 10% of those active in the economic activity). Misalignment in the labor market also affects the level of the average salary in the region, which (in certain specialties) can reach 60,000 RUR. At the same time, the level of wages in the port is significantly higher than the average wage in the area (on average, it is higher by 20-100%, depending on the nature of labor and qualification). The current situation led to the opening of a Kingisepp branch of the State Enterprise &#8220;Training center of Leningrad Oblast&#8221;, aimed at preparation of dock workers, sling operators, crane operators, engine drivers, technicians, boiler facility operators and of other technical professions.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Prospects</strong><strong> of transport and logistics and port and industrial activity in Kingisepp District in the new geoeconomic reality</strong></p>
<p>At present, our country is fully experiencing the effects of the destabilization of the geopolitical situation in Eurasia, the consequences of illegal sanctions adopted by the political leadership of the United States, the European Union and several other countries, as well as sharp decline in world prices for major export commodities from Russia &#8211; oil and natural gas, which resulted in a nearly twofold decrease in the national currency rate. The geopolitical and geoeconomic context leads to implementation of programs of forced import substitution and enhancement of domestic production in the Russian Federation. This might suggest recalling an interview of London School of Economics Professor Carlota Perez about Russia: &#8220;The key issue of the current agenda is what to produce? We have three options: industries of the current technological structure, for example, information and communication technologies; industries of the future technological wave (bio-, nano-, &#8220;green&#8221; technologies); and finally, industries of former technological structures &#8211; from services to agriculture. Which one to choose? The correct answer is that you have to select all of these three options at once. Youshoulddoeverything!&#8221; (Cited from [24]).</p>
<p>In the 2000s, signs of new industrialization were seen in the Saint-Petersburg coastal region, including Saint-Petersburg and the western part of Leningrad Oblast. Up until 2013-2014, it was carried out mainly by foreign companies, which were bringing their production in the region. This production was focused on the growing domestic demand. However, due to the significant reduction in effective demand and a high dollar exchange rate, enterprises of the northwest (primarily, those that are the “closest” to the major ports) gained an additional competitive advantage in foreign markets, their products became relatively cheaper. It is no coincidence that some car manufacturers, such as, for example, &#8220;Hyundai Manufacturing RUS&#8221;, begin to look closely at external markets. In particular, they launched production of “Hyundai Solaris” cars for Egypt and Lebanon, which soon will be exported. By the end of 2015, more than four thousand customized “Hyundai Solaris” cars are planned to be shipped to Egypt and Lebanon [25]. Chances are high that the port of Ust-Luga will handle these shipments.</p>
<p>Many other manufacturers of Saint-Petersburg and Leningrad Oblast are also expanding their export potential.</p>
<p>In 2014, export earnings of the company &#8220;Nokian Tyres&#8221; LLC, which holds the 13th place among the leading exporters of the Northwestern Federal District, amounted to 690 million USD, which showed an increase of 13% in comparison to 2013. In 2014, &#8220;Hyundai Manufacturing RUS&#8221; LLC for the first time achieved its export earnings of 650 million USD, and &#8220;Atomproekt&#8221; JSC (&#8220;Rosatom&#8221; SC) increased its indicators up to 470 million USD [26]. In 2015, the &#8220;Siemens Gas Turbine Technologies&#8221; company (SGTT) launched its production in the settlement of Gorelovo. The company immediately announced its export orientation and a desire to ship their products through Ust-Luga.</p>
<p>The military-industrial export of Russia is growing. In 2014, it amounted to 15 billion USD, which showed an increase by 45% compared to 2010. The total order portfolio for the end of 2014 was 49 billion USD [27]. The share of the military exports in the total exports of the Russian Federation in 2014 was 3% (in 2010 &#8211; 2.6%). The port of Ust-Luga also has a priority position for its support.</p>
<p>It should be noted that the prospects for expanding industrial exports of Russia in general and of the Saint-Petersburg coastal zone in particular depend on bringing industrial production “closer” to the already established port infrastructure. The latter, at the same time, will become significantly more attractive not only for Russian investors, but also for foreign ones. The appearance of the first foreign state fund of the United Arab Emirates «Mubadala Development» [28] in the port of Ust-Luga could mark a new stage in the development of the whole port and logistics complex. This could create an example for other companies and funds of the Middle East and South Eastern Asia, that are able to invest in projects on the territory of the Saint-Petersburg coastal zone.</p>
<p>Other perspectives are associated with the positioning of Kingisepp District in the global production, information and communication links. First of all, this concerns the Trans-Eurasian Corridor &#8220;One Belt, One Road&#8221; (&#8220;New Silk Road&#8221;), which aims to connect China and Europe – inter alia, via Russia. The route of the northern railway corridor goes from Western China to Europe via Kazakhstan and Russia to the Baltic Sea; from there its western branch will go via Belarus and via Poland to Germany and the Netherlands. It is evident that the Russian ports on the Gulf of Finland will be connected to this global artery. Under these circumstances, the role of the coastal zone in the territorial socio-economic development will increase both at the microlevel (separate urban settlements, administrative districts) and at the mesolevel. The range of various effects of marine economic activity will expand even further.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>About the authors: </strong></p>
<p><strong>A.G. Druzhinin &#8211; </strong>Doctor of Geography, Professor, Director of the Northern-Caucasian Research Institute of Economic and Social Problems of the South Federal University.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>S.S. Lachininskii – </strong>PhD in Geography, Research Fellow at the Laboratory of Comprehensive Studies of the Spatial Development of the regions, Institute of Problems of Regional Economics of the RAS; Assistant Professor of the Department of Economic and Social Geography, Saint-Petersburg State University.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>List of References: </strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<ol>
<li><em>Reviving the Ocean Economy:</em> the case for action &#8211; 2015. WWF International, Gland, Switzerland, Geneva, 60 pp.</li>
<li><em>Cowen Deborah</em>, Neil Smith after Geopolitics? From the Geopolitical Social to Geo-economics // Antipode.  – 2009. – vol. 41. – № 1. – pp 22–48.</li>
<li><em>Commission</em> on Marine Science Engineering and Resources. Our nation and The sea: a plan for national action. Washington: US Government Printing Office; 1969</li>
<li><em>Humphrey S, Burbridge P.</em> Planning and management processes sectoral and territorial cooperation. Thematic study D, in European Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management; 1999. / http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/home.htm.</li>
<li><em>Sal&#8217;nikov S.S. Jekonomicheskaja geografija okeana – novoe perspektivnoe napravlenie jekonomicheskoj i social&#8217;noj geografii // Sovetskaja geografija. L., 1984. – S. 231–243.</em></li>
<li><em>Slevich S.B. Okean: resursy i hozjajstvo [Tekst] / S. B. Slevich. – L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1988. – 189 s.</em></li>
<li><em>Bezrukov L.A. Kontinental&#8217;no-okeanicheskaja dihotomija v mezhdunarodnom i regional&#8217;nom razvitii. Novosibirsk: Akademicheskoe izdatel&#8217;stvo «Geo», 2008. – 369 s.</em></li>
<li><em>Green</em> Paper. Towards a Future Maritime Policy for the Union: a European Vision for the Ocean. CEC. Brussels. 7.6.2006. COM (2006) 275 final.</li>
<li><em>The Role</em> of Maritime Clusters to Enhance the Strength and Development of Maritime Sectors // European Commission Website. 2009. URL: http://ec.europa.eu /maritimeaffairs/pdf/clusters</li>
<li><em>10.Druzhinin A.G. Jekonomicheskij potencial primorskoj zony: ponjatijno-kategorial&#8217;nye osnovy koncepcii // Izvestija vuzov. Severo-Kavkazskij region. Obshhestvennye nauki – 2004. &#8211; №4. – S.54-60.</em></li>
<li><em>Hans Kundnani</em> Germany as a geoeconomic Power // The Washington Quarterly, 2011, pp. 31-45.</li>
<li><em><a href="URL://.russianports.ru/index.html">URL://.russianports.ru/index.html</a></em> (date of accses: 28.08.2015 г.)</li>
<li><em>URL:</em>//ria.ru/economy/20150625/1087711156.html (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.)</li>
<li><em>Houston</em>: Energy Powerhouse. URL: //www.houston.org/assets/pdf/opportunity/Energy-Data-Sheet.pdf (Accessed on: 11.03.2015 28.08.2015 г.)</li>
<li><em>URL</em>://forumtek.ru/press-centre/industry-news/industry-news_276.html (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.).</li>
<li>The National Rating Agency. URL//www.ra-national.ru/press_release/55482/277496 (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.)</li>
<li><em>Kuznecov S.V., Lachininskij S.S. Sovremennaja traktovka kategorii «geojekonomicheskoe polozhenie» i ee verifikacija na primere Sankt-Peterburgskoj aglomeracii // Baltijskij region, №1 (19), 2014, s. 103-121</em></li>
<li><em>Kuznecova O. A. Piramida faktorov social&#8217;no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija regionov // Voprosy jekonomiki. 2013. № 2. S. 121—131.</em></li>
<li><em>Artobolevskij S.S. Tochka zrenija: Rossijskaja regional&#8217;naja politika: modernizacija ili deformacija prostranstva // Sovremennye proizvoditel&#8217;nye sily. M., SOPS, 2012, s.82-85.</em></li>
<li><em>Doklad glavy administracii MO «Kingiseppskij rajon» V.Je. Geshele na soveshhanii po itogam social&#8217;no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija Kingiseppskogo rajona v 2014 g. i zadacham na 2015 g. URL:// http://www.kingisepplo.ru/documents/ dokladi_glavi.htm </em></li>
<li><em>Doklad glavy administracii MO «Kingiseppskij municipal&#8217;nyj rajon» na soveshhanii po itogam social&#8217;no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija  v 2011 g. i zadacham na 2012 g. URL://www.kingisepplo.ru/documents/dokladi_glavi2012.htm </em></li>
<li><em>Bazy dannyh municipal&#8217;nyh obrazovanij-2013. St. sbornik. – M.: Goskomstat Rossii – Rosstat, 2014 g.База</em> Евростата-2011-2014 гг. URL: // ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/regions /data/database</li>
<li><em>Эксперт</em> №25 (856) от 21.06.2013, URL://expert.ru/expert/2013/25 /konsensus-ne-dostignut/ (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.)</li>
<li><em>Rossijskaja gazeta. </em>URL://www.rg.ru/2015/08/25/hyundai-site.html (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.).</li>
<li><em>URL</em>://expert.ru/ratings/top-50-krupnejshih-eksporterov-szfo-po-itogam-2014-goda-mln-rub-mln-dollx-eksportnaya-vyiruchka_xx/ (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.)</li>
<li><em>Federal&#8217;naja sluzhba po voenno-tehnicheskomu sotrudnichestvu RF, OAO «Rosoboronjeksport»</em></li>
<li><em>URL</em>://portnews.ru/news/205305 /( Accessed on: 31.08.2015 г.)</li>
</ol>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>[1]According to our calculations, in accordance with the O. Merck Index (1 TEU, which equals 28200 kg in the metric system, generates 2538 USD of the added value in services), therefore the Ust-Luga Container Terminal should generate about 1.12 billion USD in the port per year.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://en.abfund.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1096</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Industry in the Kaliningrad region under the free/special economic zone (FEZ/SEZ)</title>
		<link>http://en.abfund.org/?p=1060</link>
		<comments>http://en.abfund.org/?p=1060#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:37:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Amber Bridge. Journal of Regional Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[№1 (4) 2015]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Economic Zone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kaliningrad Oblast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Manufacturing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://en.abfund.org/?p=1060</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Yury Mikhailovich Zverev  &#8211; Candidate of Geographical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Geography, Nature and Spatial Development, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Kaliningrad. The article discusses changes in the industry of the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation since the beginning of the 1990s that occurred under the influence of the FEZ/SEZ. [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong> Yury Mikhailovich Zverev  &#8211; Candidate of Geographical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Geography, Nature and Spatial Development, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Kaliningrad.</strong></p>
<p><em>The article discusses changes in the industry of the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation since the beginning of the 1990s that occurred under the influence of the FEZ/SEZ. Its implementation, in turn, was primarily due to the changed geopolitical and geo-economic situation in the region. The main result of these changes was the restructuring of the regional industry, which caused import-substituting industries to play a major role (including those that previously either did not exist or were poorly developed). On April 1, 2016, customs concessions of the SEZ will no longer be valid (while tax breaks will be preserved until 2031). This fact together with Russia’s accession to the WTO makes the continued existence of the SEZ mainly in the mode of import substitution difficult, if not impossible. In this regard, this paper discusses the prospects for further development of the industry of the Kaliningrad region under the changed and changing conditions.</em></p>
<p><em>Key words: Kaliningrad region, industry, manufacturing, free/special economic zone (FEZ/SEZ).</em></p>
<p>By the end of the 1980s the level of the industrial development of the Kaliningrad region was slightly below the national average (in 1989 the region accounted for 0.6% of the population of the RSFSR, but its share in the total Russian industrial output was lower &#8211; 0.55%) [1, P. 121].</p>
<p>In the structure of industry three sectors played the key role &#8211; mechanical engineering, fishing and pulp and paper industry (Table 1).</p>
<p>Table 1</p>
<p><strong>Industrial structure in the Kaliningrad region in 1989, % of the total </strong></p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="195"><strong>Industrial sectors</strong></td>
<td width="85"><strong>Cost of the main funds </strong></td>
<td width="85"><strong>Number of employed </strong></td>
<td width="85"><strong>Volume of production </strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Fishing</td>
<td width="85"> 49,3</td>
<td width="85">  19,1</td>
<td width="85"> 33,3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Meat and dairy industry</td>
<td width="85">   2,1</td>
<td width="85">    3,2</td>
<td width="85">   7,7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Other sectors of food industry</td>
<td width="85">1,0</td>
<td width="85">3,1</td>
<td width="85">3,8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Mechanical engineering</td>
<td width="85"> 17,1</td>
<td width="85">  41,9</td>
<td width="85">27,9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Pulp and paper industry</td>
<td width="85">   7,2</td>
<td width="85">    7,4</td>
<td width="85">  7,1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Forestry and woodworking industry</td>
<td width="85">2,0</td>
<td width="85">5,3</td>
<td width="85">3,7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Electric-power industry</td>
<td width="85">   6,5</td>
<td width="85">     2,7</td>
<td width="85">   1,3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Fuel industry</td>
<td width="85">   4,3</td>
<td width="85">     0,5</td>
<td width="85">   1,2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Coal-tar industry</td>
<td width="85">   0,5</td>
<td width="85">     0,4</td>
<td width="85">   0,8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Construction industry</td>
<td width="85">   3,0</td>
<td width="85">     3,9</td>
<td width="85">   2,6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Consumer goods industry</td>
<td width="85">   1,1</td>
<td width="85">     7,7</td>
<td width="85">   4,9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Flour-and-cereals industry and compound feed industry</td>
<td width="85">0,7</td>
<td width="85">0,8</td>
<td width="85">3,2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">Other sectors</td>
<td width="85">    5,3</td>
<td width="85">    4,1</td>
<td width="85">    2,5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="195">                                       Total</td>
<td width="85">100,0</td>
<td width="85">100,0</td>
<td width="85">100,0</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Source: [1, P. 119].</em></p>
<p>The share of the Kaliningrad region accounted for 10% of the food fish production in Russia, 11% of the cellulose production and 3% of the paper production (1992) [1, P. 121]. In mechanical engineering, the main role was played by companies related to the fishing industry (production of instruments, equipment, construction of small fishing vessels, ship repair), military shipbuilding, electronics and electrical engineering, railway coach manufacturing.</p>
<p>Industry in the region had a high degree of participation in the national division of labour and at the same time was heavily dependent on external supplies of raw materials, fuel and energy and the stability of the industrial relations.</p>
<p>In addition to the general problems of the Russian industry in transition, two interrelated factors substantially affected the further development of the Kaliningrad industry:</p>
<p>The conversion of the Kaliningrad region into an exclave of the sovereign Russia, separated from it by territories of foreign countries (not the union republics, as before);</p>
<p>The creation of the free economic zone (FEZ) in 1991 and of the special economic zone (SEZ) in 1996. The zones were largely seen as mechanisms of compensation for the isolated geographical location of the region.</p>
<p>The collapse of the Soviet Union and the transformation of the region into an exclave of Russia led to the complex and costly transport links with the main part of the Russian Federation, disintegration of production chains, which included Kaliningrad enterprises (especially mechanical engineering) within the division of labour in the Soviet Union, breaking of the economic ties with Lithuania, Latvia and Belarus, that were established during the Soviet period, complicating conditions of the pulp and paper industry, located 1500 kilometres away from sources of raw materials in the North of Russia. The former branch structure of the region&#8217;s economy because of its spatial isolation from the main territory ceased to comply with the changed economic conditions to a greater extent than in other regions of Russia.</p>
<p>The fish production sector, which formed the basis for the Kaliningrad region industry, was additionally negatively affected by the termination of state subsidies and the rise in the cost of fuel (which previously formed more than half of the cost of production). This led to the decrease of ocean fishing, sale of vessels and a sharp decline in production volumes.</p>
<p>The FEZ/SEZ regime impacted the industry in the Kaliningrad region in 1992-1998 in two ways.</p>
<p>On the one hand, following the adoption in 1996 of the law on special economic zones in the region, there began to appear new import-substituting enterprises (for example, in May 1997, was commissioned the first phase of the “Avtotor” company&#8217;s factory to assemble Korean cars KIA). On the other hand, duty-free imports further contributed to the decline in industrial production (primarily in the food industry and in the production of consumer goods), that did not withstand foreign competition.</p>
<p>Ultimately, the decline in industrial production in the Kaliningrad region in 1992-1998 proved to be more profound than in the whole of Russia. Industrial production in 1998 decreased by 6 times compared to 1990 (Fig. 1).</p>
<p><strong>Figure 1. Dynamics of the industrial production, % of 1990. </strong></p>
<p>Percent, Russian Federation, Kaliningrad region</p>
<p><em>Compiled based on: [2, p. 396; P. 396; 3]. </em></p>
<p><em> </em></p>
<p>The region’s economy was deindustrialized. The available production capacities were taken out of the production and skilled workers would change professions or became unemployed. The greatest damage was incurred by the industry sectors mainly in the domestic (regional and nationwide) market (machinery, local food processing, building materials industry, consumer goods industry). The good bargain compared to them had those sectors that benefited from a sharp increase in domestic prices of their products (electricity, fuel industry), increased export of products (pulp and paper industry and to some extent the fishing industry) due to the regime of the FEZ/SEZ and the general liberalization of foreign trade or used a combination of both factors (oil industry). In these industries, the decline in production was less than the industry average.</p>
<p>As a result, in current prices, the share of the fuel and energy sector in the industrial structure of the Kaliningrad region has increased considerably due to rising prices for fuel and electricity (from 3.5% in 1990 to 30.6% in 1998) with a sharp drop in the share of industries of the &#8220;upper floors&#8221; (the final stages of manufacturing) &#8211; particularly machinery, consumer goods industry and building materials industry (Table 2).</p>
<p>Table 2</p>
<p><strong>Changes in the structure of the industrial production of the Kaliningrad region, 1990-1998, % of the total industrial production </strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" width="156"><strong>Industrial sectors</strong></td>
<td colspan="2" width="195"><strong>At corresponding years’ values </strong></td>
<td rowspan="2" width="117"><strong>1998 </strong><strong>at 1990 values</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="106">1990</td>
<td width="88">1998</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Industry, total</td>
<td width="106">100,0</td>
<td width="88">100,0</td>
<td width="117">100,0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Electric-power industry</td>
<td width="106">    2,5</td>
<td width="88">  22,3</td>
<td width="117">    4,1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Fuel industry</td>
<td width="106">    1,0</td>
<td width="88">    8,3</td>
<td width="117">    2,0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Mechanical engineerting</td>
<td width="106">  27,2</td>
<td width="88">  11,9</td>
<td width="117">  16,9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Forestry</td>
<td width="106">  10,1</td>
<td width="88">    8,1</td>
<td width="117">    7,7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Building materials industry</td>
<td width="106">    2,8</td>
<td width="88">    1,1</td>
<td width="117">    1,1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Consumer goods industry</td>
<td width="106">    4,4</td>
<td width="88">    1,7</td>
<td width="117">    1,2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Food production</td>
<td width="106">  39,4</td>
<td width="88">  39,3</td>
<td width="117">42,2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="156">Other sectors</td>
<td width="106">  12,6</td>
<td width="88">    7,3</td>
<td width="117">24,9</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Compiled based on: [4, P. 15].</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Since 1999, the economy of the Kaliningrad region, as well as throughout Russia, gradually began to emerge from the crisis. Production growth was particularly strong in industry, where since 2000 it has been significantly higher than the average Russian indicators (Table 3).</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Table 3</p>
<p><strong>Dynamics of indices of the industrial production in the Kaliningrad region and the Russian Federation as a whole, 2000-2007, (% of previous year) </strong></p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="108">Indicators</td>
<td width="40">2000</td>
<td width="40">2001</td>
<td width="40">2002</td>
<td width="40">2003</td>
<td width="40">2004</td>
<td width="40">2005</td>
<td width="40">2006</td>
<td width="40">2007</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="9" width="427">Industrial production index</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="108">Kaliningrad region</td>
<td width="40">117,0</td>
<td width="40">110,1</td>
<td width="40">104,2</td>
<td width="40">104,7</td>
<td width="40">122,5</td>
<td width="40">127,4</td>
<td width="40">166,6</td>
<td width="40">114,4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="108">Russia as a whole</td>
<td width="40">108,7</td>
<td width="40">102,9</td>
<td width="40">103,1</td>
<td width="40">108,9</td>
<td width="40">108,0</td>
<td width="40">105,1</td>
<td width="40">106,3</td>
<td width="40">106,8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="9" width="427">Industrial index for “manufacturing”</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="108">Kaliningrad region</td>
<td width="40">119,5</td>
<td width="40">123,3</td>
<td width="40">108,7</td>
<td width="40">107,8</td>
<td width="40">124,1</td>
<td width="40">106,3</td>
<td width="40">131,0</td>
<td width="40">128,1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="108">Russia as a whole</td>
<td width="40">112,8</td>
<td width="40">110,9</td>
<td width="40">102,0</td>
<td width="40">101,1</td>
<td width="40">110,3</td>
<td width="40">110,5</td>
<td width="40">108,4</td>
<td width="40">110,5</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Compiled based on: [3, 5].</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>In 2007, the volume of the industrial production in the Kaliningrad region exceeded the level of 2000 by nearly 3.6 times (on average in Russia by almost 1.5 times) (current prices) (based on [3]). In 2000-2012 the share of the Kaliningrad region of the industrial production of the Russian Federation increased from 0.3% to 0.96%, which was 1.75 times higher than in the late 1980s [1, 6, 7].</p>
<p>The following factors contributed to the rapid industrial growth:</p>
<p>• The development of import substitution industries due to the regime of the free customs zone[1]and tax benefits[2];</p>
<p>• The devaluation of the Ruble in 1999-2000;</p>
<p>• Increased demand on the Russian domestic market, associated with the growth of incomes of the enterprises and the public;</p>
<p>• Increased attention to the area of the Federal Center, which was one of the most important factors in attracting investment to the region from other regions of Russia (mainly from Moscow and Saint Petersburg);</p>
<p>• Proximity to foreign sources of raw materials, components and semi-finished products.</p>
<p>A characteristic feature of the industrial growth, as noted above, was import substituting. This was reflected in production of goods using foreign raw materials, semi-finished products and components for the national market. This is evidenced by the increase in the export of goods produced in the SEZ in the Kaliningrad region to the rest of Russia from 0.42 billion Dollars in 2000 to 6.5 billion Dollars in 2008 [9].</p>
<p>At the same time the largest share in the total export of production into other regions of Russia accounted for cars, canned meat, TV-sets, canned fish, self-propelled vehicles and cranes, frozen fish, carpets and floor coverings [10, P. 21].</p>
<p>The SEZ regime contributed to the emergence of new industries in the region operating on the national market. There appeared whole new industries that did not previously exist (e.g., car manufacturing, production of TV-sets and other consumer electronics, etc.). Sectors that had previously been represented relatively weakly, significantly increased (furniture and meat-packing industry). For a number of new industrial products the Kaliningrad region became recognizable and even evolved into one of the leaders in the Russian Federation. At the same time, it continued to occupy a prominent place for the production of some of the traditional industrial products (food fish production (including canned fish), fish and seafood, pulp and paper, vodka and beverage products, and others).</p>
<p>Before the crisis in 2009 about 75% of all Russian TV-sets were produced in the Kaliningrad region [11]. Other types of home appliances included vacuum cleaners (84% of Russia&#8217;s total volume in 2006 [12 P. 14]), microwave ovens, DVD-players, etc. The main plant for the production of TV-sets – the Kaliningrad &#8220;Telebalt&#8221; LLC – at that time was the largest engineering company in the region in terms of the volume of production. The largest manufacturer of vacuum cleaners was &#8220;Radioimport-R&#8221; LLC (Kaliningrad). In 2003 in Chernyakhovsk the Moscow holding &#8220;Polar&#8221; opened the plant &#8220;Televolna&#8221; LLC with the annual total capacity up to 2.5 million units of equipment (TV-sets, washing machines, vacuum cleaners, microwave ovens).</p>
<p>JSC &#8220;Avtotor&#8221; (Kaliningrad), founded in 1997, that collected Korean cars KIA, in 1999 additionally began to assemble German cars BMW, and in 2004 – American cars by General Motors. In 2008, the company brought the car production to 108.5 thousand cars, thus becoming the largest manufacturer of foreign cars in Russia [13].</p>
<p>In Gusev in 2007 the Russian corporation General Satellite (now &#8211; GS Group) for the first time in our country hosted in leased premises domestic production of receivers for receiving satellite and terrestrial television. Later Gusev was chosen by the company for the creation of an innovation cluster &#8220;Technopolis Gusev&#8221; (from August 2012 &#8211; &#8220;Technopolis GS»).</p>
<p>About a hundred of small and medium-sized enterprises for the production of furniture were created in the region. They would supply their production to more than 40 cities of Russia, as well as for export to the CIS, the European Union (Germany, France, UK, Belgium, Denmark, Austria), Israel and the US. They accounted for about 6% of the sales of furniture in Russia [14].</p>
<p>There were about 160 meat processing plants (mainly operating on imported raw materials). For the production of canned meat the Kaliningrad region ranked first in Russia (22.6% of all Russian canned meat in 2006) [15].</p>
<p>However, import-substituting industries, working on imported raw materials and components, were heavily dependent on the stability of supplies from abroad, and on the volume of demand on the national market, which is the main focus of their production.</p>
<p>Despite a significant decline compared to the beginning of the 1990s, the fishing industry maintained its national significance.</p>
<p>At the same time, the pulp and paper industry found itself in a difficult situation. Due to the remoteness of the raw material base (North-West of Russia), it could thrive only based on export. However, the demand for pulp in the world market is very volatile and could not guarantee stable operation. In addition, the companies used environmentally hazardous obsolete technologies for chlorine bleaching of pulp and had no effective treatment facilities contrary to Russia&#8217;s obligations on protection of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea in the framework of the Helsinki Convention. As a result, in 2004, the former pulp-and-paper combine TsBK-1 was stopped in Kaliningrad (JSC &#8220;Darita&#8221;), in 2007 &#8211; the former pulp-and-paper plant TsBZ-2 (Closed joint stock corporation &#8220;Cepruss&#8221;) in Kaliningrad.</p>
<p>Increased production of certain types of industrial products was also caused by exports. For example, JSC &#8220;Baltic Shipyard “Yantar”” (Kaliningrad), that previously had been building almost exclusively warships, set up production of civilian ships for customers from Germany, the Netherlands, Norway. JSC &#8220;Baltkran&#8221; (Kaliningrad) exported cranes into Finland, Denmark, Norway, Germany, the Netherlands, France, Spain, Italy, China, Japan and other countries. Sewing enterprises of Kaliningrad and Sovetsk were working on give-and-take raw materials. The Kaliningrad ZAO &#8220;Cepruss&#8221; exported pulp. However, the export potential of the Kaliningrad industry has not been used to the full.</p>
<p>In the oil industry in July 2004, &#8220;LUKOIL-Kaliningradmorneft&#8221; LLC started oil production at Kravtsovskoye field (D-6), located on the Baltic Sea shelf. Field commissioning allowed to increase oil production in the Kaliningrad region in 2004-2007 by 1.76 times (from 0.83 to 1.45 million tonnes) [16, P. 77].</p>
<p>The higher-than-anticipated growth of production of the goods with advanced processing contributed to positive changes in the industrial structure. For example, the share of mechanical engineering in the structure of industrial production (at current prices) increased during 1999-2004 by more than 2.3 times, and it once again ranked first among industries [17, P. 2; 18, P. 131].</p>
<p>The transition from the SEZ in 1996 to the SEZ in 2006 almost coincided with another radical change in the geopolitical and geo-economic situation of the Kaliningrad region &#8211; extension of the European Union on 1 May 2004. Following the accession of Poland and Lithuania, the region became a kind of the Russian &#8220;island&#8221; within this integration group. The EU enlargement worsened conditions for the supply of the Kaliningrad production into other regions of Russia and thereby complicated the import-substituting economy of the exclave. After the accession of Lithuania to the EU on 1 May 2004 the cargo transit got more expensive by 1.3-1.5 times due to the phytosanitary and veterinary control, as well as due to other paid services, imposed by the Lithuanian side [19, P. 26]. The special agreement with the European Commission (EU Commission) and Lithuania, that was suggested by Russia, which would guarantee the stability of the regime and the conditions of transit and eliminate any possibility of their deterioration in the long term, has never been achieved.</p>
<p>In 2008-2009 the Kaliningrad region, like the rest of Russia, felt the effects of the global economic crisis.</p>
<p>The economic recession in the Kaliningrad region turned out to be more profound than the Russian average. In the industry and the manufacturing sector the recession was somewhat smaller (Table 4).</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Table 4</p>
<p><strong>The dynamics of the industry production in the Kaliningrad region and the Russian Federation as a whole, 2008-2009 (% to the previous year)</strong></p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="249"><strong>Indicators </strong></td>
<td width="91"><strong>2008</strong></td>
<td width="91"><strong>2009</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" width="432">Industrial production index</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="249">Kaliningrad region</td>
<td width="91">   101,8</td>
<td width="91">  95,3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="249">Russia as a whole</td>
<td width="91">   100,6</td>
<td width="91">  89,3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" width="432">Industrial index for “manufacturing”</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="249">Kaliningrad region</td>
<td width="91">  101,2</td>
<td width="91">  93,0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="249">Russia as a whole</td>
<td width="91">  100,5</td>
<td width="91">  84,8</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Compiled based on: [3, 5].</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>First of all, the crisis has led to a sharp decline in new import-substituting industries, which are the engine of the economic growth.</p>
<p>In 2009, the production of TV-sets declined by more than 70%; of microwave ovens by 80%, digital laser players &#8211; more than 80%, vacuum cleaners &#8211; more than 85%. The number of employed in the TV cluster of the Kaliningrad region by the end of the first quarter of 2009 decreased from 12 to 2.5 thousand people [11]. &#8220;Avtotor&#8221; in 2009 although remained the largest producer of foreign cars in Russia, but the production of cars in 2007-2009 decreased from 106.7 to 60.3 thousand cars [20]. Production in the furniture industry in the region by the summer of 2009 had decreased by about half compared to the previous year; about 8% of jobs were cut [14].</p>
<p>The curtailment of the pulp and paper industry continued. In May 2009 the &#8220;Neman Pulp and Paper Mill” LLC was declared bankrupt.</p>
<p>At the same time, commissioning of new enterprises in the period of 2008-2009 continued. For example, in 2008 in Chernyakhovsk the &#8220;Arvi NPK&#8221; LLC, which is part of the Lithuanian group of companies ARVI, launched the only plant in Russia, engaged in production of complex mineral fertilizers using the unique American technology of steam granulation; a high-tech fish-canning complex &#8220;Roskon&#8221; LLC was opened in Pionersky. In 2009, the Russian Corporation “General Satellite” (now – “GS Group”) launched the project &#8220;Area of scientific and technological development &#8211; Technopolis Gusev&#8221; and opened two plants &#8211; JSC NPO &#8220;TsTS&#8221; (production of digital set-top boxes for the reception of terrestrial and satellite television) and &#8220;Prankor&#8221; LLC (production of cases of TV set-top boxes and satellite dishes). In the same year, the corporation &#8220;Soyuz&#8221; has commissioned a plant for processing of edible oil in Kaliningrad and “Hipp” LLC, owned by the German company Hipp Gmbh&amp;Co, opened a production facility for the production of baby food in Mamonovo.</p>
<p>The economic growth in the Kaliningrad region, as well as throughout Russia, resumed in 2010. However, already in 2012, the growth rate slowed down and this slowdown continued in 2013. In the industry in 2013 there was even a small decline in production compared to the previous year (Table 5).</p>
<p>Table 5</p>
<p><strong>The dynamics of the industry production in the Kaliningrad region and the Russian Federation as a whole, 2010-2013 (% to the previous year)</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="197"><strong>Indicators </strong></td>
<td width="72"><strong>2010</strong></td>
<td width="72"><strong>2011</strong></td>
<td width="63"><strong>2012</strong></td>
<td width="63"><strong>2013</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="5" width="467">Industrial production index</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="197">Kaliningrad region</td>
<td width="72">116,0</td>
<td width="72">150,1</td>
<td width="63">101,9</td>
<td width="63">  99,1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="197">Russia as a whole</td>
<td width="72">107,3</td>
<td width="72">105,0</td>
<td width="63">103,4</td>
<td width="63">100,4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="5" width="467">Industrial index for “manufacturing”</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="197">Kaliningrad region</td>
<td width="72">130,2</td>
<td width="72">168,3</td>
<td width="63">103,2</td>
<td width="63">101,4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="197">Russia as a whole</td>
<td width="72">110,6</td>
<td width="72">108,0</td>
<td width="63">105,1</td>
<td width="63">100,5</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Compiled based on: [3, 5].</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Manufacturing remained the economic growth driver in the post-crisis period. Production of transport vehicles (automotive and shipbuilding industries) (production growth by almost 5 times) had the largest growth rate. Its share in the structure of the volume of shipped goods of own production, work and services by own means for the manufacturing industry for 2009-2013 increased from 30.4 to 57.1%. Due to the commissioning of the plant for the production of mineral fertilizers and the facility for production of polyethyleneterephthalate (PET), the volume of shipped goods of chemical production in the period of 2009-2012 increased by nearly 7 times. Its share in shipments of manufacturing industries for the period of 2009-2013 increased from 0.8 to 2.5% [21, P.89-90; 22 P, 19].</p>
<p>The resumption of the economic growth was based both on the post-crisis recovery of production at existing facilities, and the commissioning of new enterprises encouraged by the preferential conditions envisaged under the SEZ. For example, the following facilities were put into operation in industry in 2010-2014:</p>
<ul>
<li>“House-Building Plant “White key”” LLC (Gusev) &#8211; production of cottages of individual planning (2010);</li>
<li>“The Fifth Element&#8221; LLC (Belkin, Krasnoznamensky District) – production of ceramic bricks and blocks (2010);</li>
<li>“Group of companies “Atlantis””(near Ladushkin) &#8211; processing of fish and seafood (2010);</li>
<li>“AMEKO-Kaliningrad” LLC (Mamonovo) &#8211; production of baby food (2010);</li>
<li>“Food products” LLC (Gusev) &#8211; production of canned meat (2010);</li>
<li>“Alko-Nafta” CJSC (Pregolsky) &#8211; the largest plant for the production of polyethyleneterephthalate (PET) in Russia and Eastern Europe with a nominal capacity of 220 thousand tonnes per year (2011);</li>
<li>“The first cardboard factory” (Gusev) – production of corrugated packaging (2011);</li>
<li>“National Product” LLC (Pravdinsk) – production of prepared and preserved products of meat and poultry meat, meat by-products and blood of animals (2011);</li>
<li>“GS Nanotech” (Gusev) &#8211; production of complex hybrid microcircuits using the technology “System in Package” and “Flip Chip” and modern crystals from the advanced chips from the world&#8217;s leading producers (2012);</li>
<li>Company “Avtotor” (Alexander Kosmodemyansky) – the complete production cycle of KIA Sorento cars (2013);</li>
<li>“Siberian Delicacy Kaliningrad&#8221; LLC (Kotelnikovo, Zelenograd district) &#8211; production of meat products, including semi-finished products and sausage products (2013);</li>
<li>“Kaliningrad delicacy” LLC (Kaliningrad) &#8211; production of meat and sausage products (2013);</li>
<li>“BaltAgroKorm” LLC (Dobrovolsk, Krasnoznamensky District) &#8211; production of compound animal feed (2013);</li>
<li>“Wallpaper factory “Prima Italiana”” LLC (Kamenka, Zelenograd district) – production of wallpaper (2013);</li>
<li>“Infamed-K” LLC (Bagrationovsk) &#8211; production of the antiseptic &#8220;Miramistin&#8221; and eye drops &#8220;Okomistin&#8221; on its base (2014);</li>
<li>“Technoservice” LLC (to the west of the village of Novoye Lugovoe, Guryev urban district) &#8211; production of gas silicate blocks (2014).</li>
</ul>
<p>&#8220;Avtotor&#8221; in 2012 increased its car production up to 265 thousand cars [23]. In October 2013 the company started the construction of full-profile cluster of automobile industries. It is planned to build 5 automobile plants of the full cycle with the capacity not less than 250 thousand cars per year (up to 20% will be used for export) and 16 plants for the production of automotive components, which will be used not only for own production, but also for other Russian and foreign markets [24, 25].</p>
<p>As of 1 January 2014, the register of the SEZ residents in the Kaliningrad region included 89 organizations. The volume of their stated investments was 73.6 billion Rubles. The average number of employees of resident enterprises at the stage of entering the full capacity production is estimated to amount to more than 15 thousand people [26].</p>
<p>At the same time, curtailment of the pulp and paper industry continued. In 2010, the “Soviet pulp-and-paper plant” JSC was declared bankrupt. Back in 2008 it had suffered from a serious fire and ceased pulp production. By 2014, the firm had almost ceased to exist [27]. The Neman pulp-and-paper combine periodically stops its operation, having ceased its production in some seasons in the period of 2012-2014.</p>
<p>The basis for the industries in the Kaliningrad region is currently manufacturing, which accounts for 22.2% of gross value added generated by all types of economic activities, and 11.3% of the value of fixed assets. In 2013, in the manufacturing sector there were employed 65 thousand people (20.6% of all employed in the economy of the Kaliningrad region) [21, P. 20, 36].</p>
<p>Most industrial enterprises are small. Only the &#8220;Avtotor&#8221; CJSC and the &#8220;Baltic Shipyard “Amber”” JSC have more than 3,000 employees. “Vichunai-Rus” LLC, “Milk” JSC, “Kaliningrad containerboard mill” JSC and “Food products” LLC have from 1000 to 1500 employees [28].</p>
<p>The manufacturing sector is dominated by food production and production of transport vehicles and equipment. They account for more than 3/4 of the volume of shipped goods of own production, work and services by own means for the manufacturing industry, 57.5% of the value of fixed assets of large and medium-sized enterprises and organizations of manufacturing industries and more than 45% of the average number of employees in factories and organizations in the manufacturing sector (Table 6).</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Table 6</p>
<h3><strong>Structure of the manufacturing sector of the Kaliningrad region in 2013, % of the total </strong></h3>
<table width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="40%"><strong> </strong></td>
<td width="19%">Sales ofown-produced goods, work and services by own means</td>
<td width="17%">Main assets of the large and middle-sized enterprises and organizations</td>
<td width="22%">The average number of employees</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">Manufacturing – total</td>
<td width="19%">100</td>
<td width="17%">100</td>
<td width="22%">100</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">including:production of foodproducts, including beverages, and tobacco</td>
<td width="19%">22,3</td>
<td width="17%">46,8</td>
<td width="22%">33,5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">textile and clothing industry</td>
<td width="19%"> 0,9</td>
<td width="17%">0,4</td>
<td width="22%"> 5,3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">production of leather, leather products and foot wear</td>
<td width="19%"> 0,0</td>
<td width="17%">…</td>
<td width="22%">0,3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">processing of wood and products of wood</td>
<td width="19%"> 0,3</td>
<td width="17%">2,6</td>
<td width="22%">2,0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">pulp and paper industry, publishing and printing</td>
<td width="19%"> 1,7</td>
<td width="17%">4,0</td>
<td width="22%">4,9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">chemical production</td>
<td width="19%"> 2,7</td>
<td width="17%">10,7</td>
<td width="22%">1,1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">production of rubber and plastic products</td>
<td width="19%"> 0,7</td>
<td width="17%">…</td>
<td width="22%">1,9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">production of other non-metallic mineral products</td>
<td width="19%"> 1,5</td>
<td width="17%">9,2</td>
<td width="22%">3,2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">metallurgical production and production of fabricated metal products</td>
<td width="19%"> 1,5</td>
<td width="17%">3,5</td>
<td width="22%">3,5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">production of machinery and equipment</td>
<td width="19%"> 1,4</td>
<td width="17%">4,6</td>
<td width="22%">3,6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">production of electrical, electronic and optical equipment</td>
<td width="19%">10,9</td>
<td width="17%">5,4</td>
<td width="22%">7,6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">production of transport vehicles and equipment</td>
<td width="19%">54,4</td>
<td width="17%">10,7</td>
<td width="22%">12,1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="40%">other types of production</td>
<td width="19%">  1,7</td>
<td width="17%">0,4</td>
<td width="22%">21,0</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Compiled based on: [22, P. 20, 28, 30].</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>The industry in the Kaliningrad region remains mainly import-substituting, based on the use of the SEZ benefits (primarily customs benefits) and continues to work for the national market. The majority of import-substituting industries are characterized by a very low share of value added. In 2010, the share of value added in the production of automotive products accounted for only 5.8%, the production of electronic industry &#8211; 14.8%, food industry in its part designated for export outside of the region &#8211; 13-15% [29]. Innovation of the import-substituting enterprises, as well as Kaliningrad&#8217;s economy as a whole, is low. In 2013, the proportion of organizations engaged in technological innovation in the total number of organizations in the Kaliningrad region amounted to only 3.8%, which is almost 2.5 times lower than even extremely low national average (8.9%) [30].</p>
<p>A characteristic feature of the import-substituting industry, established under the SEZ, is its &#8220;fragility&#8221;, dependence on the world situation and the state of the national market. In addition, the enclave economy to a greater extent than in other regions of Russia depends on the relations between Russia and the EU, which has been illustrated by the sanctions and counter-sanctions in connection with the events in Ukraine. Medium- and long-term prospects of most kinds of the industrial economic activity in the WTO and termination of the transitional regime regarding the SEZ in 2016 are considered to be negative (with the exception of mining and generation, transmission and distribution of electricity, gas and water) [31].</p>
<p>The changing geopolitical and economic conditions also require new strategies of the development of the Kaliningrad industry. Previous import-substituting industries based on duty-free import of raw materials and components will lose their benefits on April 1, 2016. However, companies will receive financial support in accordance with the Order of the Government of the Russian Federation #1275 dated November 29, 2014 [32], but it will only soften the consequences of the abolition of customs privileges, but will not get them back together with related economic mechanisms. It seems that in this new situation the Kaliningrad industry should move towards increasing the share of products with high added value, improve the quality and competitiveness of products, and introduce innovative products and new technologies. At the same time, small and medium-sized enterprises could act as subcontractors of leading industrial companies in the region, at least partially replacing foreign supplies. The transition to the innovative development of the industry in the region will require greater integration of science (in particular, the science and technology park &#8220;Factory&#8221; [33], established in the Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University) and production, creation of new industrial parks and development of mechanisms for technology transfer both within the region and from other regions of Russia and from abroad.</p>
<p>It is necessary to encourage exports of industrial products, even more so that in connection with the fall of the Russian Ruble the Russian production including the Kaliningrad production has become more competitive in foreign markets in terms of price. For this purpose, in particular, it is necessary to bring production in compliance with international standards and provide certification for compliance with these standards.</p>
<p>The Kaliningrad region could become one of the Russian pilot regions of the so-called &#8220;third industrial revolution&#8221;, involving the introduction of advanced technologies, such as additive technologies, or technologies layered synthesis. For this purpose it is necessary to consider establishment of the Center for technological competence of additive technologies on the basis of one of the Kaliningrad enterprises with participation of Kaliningrad (and from other regions) universities and research centers.</p>
<p>Some steps in these directions have already been made. The Concept of Industrial Policy of the Kaliningrad region was approved on August 27, 2014 [7]. The following economic activities were identified as top-priority:</p>
<ol>
<li>Production of food products, beverages and tobacco;</li>
<li>Chemical production (including pharmaceutical production);</li>
<li>Production of other non-metallic mineral products (construction materials, composite materials and products thereof);</li>
<li>Production of electrical, electronic and optical equipment (including production of TV devices and other consumer electronics);</li>
<li>Production of transport vehicles and equipment (automobile construction, shipbuilding and ship repair);</li>
<li>Other production (production of furniture, jewelry, items made of amber or with the content of amber).</li>
</ol>
<p>The following main instruments of industrial policy are envisaged in the Concept of Industrial Policy:</p>
<p>1.         Programs for development of priority industrial clusters, industrial production chains;</p>
<p>2.         Formation of industrial zones and industrial parks in the Kaliningrad region;</p>
<p>3.         Support of priority investment projects;</p>
<p>4.         Reimbursement for exhibition and promotional activities;</p>
<p>5.         Subsidies for a part of the interest rates on loans, including those involved in infrastructure projects;</p>
<p>6.         Subsidies for certification and registration of trademarks;</p>
<p>7.         Subsidies for connection to the electric power system and energy supply devices;</p>
<p>8.         Subsidies for equipment leasing;</p>
<p>9.         Subsidies for training of production personnel;</p>
<p>10.       Subsidies for production (sale) of goods, work and services for the creation and development of the infrastructure of industrial and research parks;</p>
<p>11.       Organization of the exhibition and presentation activities to promote industrial products;</p>
<p>12.       Creation of trade missions in the Russian Federation and abroad;</p>
<p>13.       Creation of business incubators and research parks;</p>
<p>14.       Training of specialists;</p>
<p>15.       Implementation of the migration policy;</p>
<p>16.       Involvement of non-governmental organizations (associations) of industrialists and entrepreneurs of the Kaliningrad region in the implementation of industrial policy.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Bibliography</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>Fedotov G.M., Zverev Yu.M. Kaliningrad alternatives. Social and economic development of the Kaliningrad region in the new geopolitical situation: Monograph. / Kaliningrad University – Kaliningrad, 1995.</li>
<li>Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2002: Stat. / Russian State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation. &#8211; M., 2002.</li>
<li>Industry production index by the territorial entity of the Russian Federation (updated 05.09.2014) // Rosstat. URL:</li>
</ol>
<p>www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/business/prom/ind_prom_sub.xls (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</p>
<ol start="4">
<li>Gareev T.R., Zhdanov V.P., Zverev Yu.M., Fedorov G.M., Zikel M.A. Establishment of the new economy of the Kaliningrad region. – Kaliningrad: Publishing house of the Kaliningrad State Univeristy, 2005.</li>
<li>Industrialindexfor “manufacturing” by the territorial entity of the Russian Federation (updated 05.09.2014) // Rosstat. URL: www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_site/business/prom/ind_obr.xls (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Social and economic situation of the Kaliningrad region // Federal target programmes of Russia. URL: http://www.programs-gov.ru/37_1.php (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Order of the Government of the Kaliningrad region dated 27 August 2014 #567 “On the Concept of Industrial Policy of the Kaliningrad region” // Consultant Plus. URLhttp://www.consultant.ru/document/regbase_doc_RLAW044_60132/ (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>The total volume of investments of 47 residents of the FEZ in the Kaliningrad region is about 26 billion Rubles // News agency “RosBusinessConsulting”. 01.11.2007. URL: http://top.rbc.ru/spb_freenews/01/11/2007/764856.shtml (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Dmitry Chemakin: Prospects of the development of the Kaliningrad region (report at the forum with the same name) // Rugrad.eu. 5 June 2011. URL: http://rugrad.eu/article/430503/ (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>ZverevYu.M. Industry of the Kaliningrad region. // Geography in the school of the 21<sup>st</sup> century. 2006. # 5. P. 20-25.</li>
<li>Denisenkov A. Cluster at the edge of the market // Expert. # 9 (648). 9 March 2009. URL: http://expert.ru/expert/2009/09/klaster_na_krayu_rynka/ (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Report on the results of financing of the Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad region in 2006. Kaliningrad: Government of the Kaliningrad region, Administration of the Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad region, 2007.</li>
<li>“Avtotor” will increase car production by 2.3 times // Motor. 28 May 2010. URL: http://motor.ru/news/2010/05/28/avtotor/ (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Dead furniture season // НовыйКалининград.Ru. 30 September 2009. URL: http://www.newkaliningrad.ru/articles/our/business/946691.html (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Russian market of the canned meat: the current state and development prospects still 2012. // Institute of Agricultural Marketing. 23.11.2007. URL: http://www.iamgroup.ru/news/full.php?nid=5&amp;binn_rubrik_pl_news=76 (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Kaliningradregion 2009. Statistical review. – Kaliningrad: The regional office of the Federal State Statistics Service in the Kaliningrad region, 2009.</li>
<li>Social and economic development of the Kaliningrad region in 1994-2001 (statistics passport). – Kaliningrad: Administration of the Kaliningrad region, Committee of the economic development and trade, 2002.</li>
<li>Kaliningradregioninfigures 2005. Statistical review. – Kaliningrad: The regional office of the Federal State Statistics Service in the Kaliningrad region, 2005.</li>
<li>Zhukova N. The farther into the EU… // Profile. # 41. 8 November 2004.</li>
<li>“Avtotor” will increase car production by 2.3 times // Motor. 28 May 2010. URL: http://motor.ru/news/2010/05/28/avtotor/ (Accessed: 17.03. 2015).</li>
<li>Kaliningradregioninfigures 2014. Statistical review. – Kaliningrad: The regional office of the Federal State Statistics Service in the Kaliningrad region, 2014.</li>
<li>Industry of the Kaliningrad region. Statisticalreview. The regional office of the Federal State Statistics Service in the Kaliningrad region, 2013.</li>
<li>“Avtotor” will decrease car production in 2014 // Vesti. Economy. 21.10.2013. URL: http://www.vestifinance.ru/articles/34369 (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>“Avtotor” together with BMW started the formation of the car cluster in Kaliningrad // Avtostat. 21.10.13. URL: http://www.autostat.ru/news/view/14752/ (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>“Avtotor Holding” LLC became a nominee of the “Development prize” in the North-Western Federal District // Expert online. 25 April 2014. URL: http://expert.ru/2014/04/25/nominantom-premii-razvitiya-po-severo-zapadnomu-federalnomu-okrugu-stal-proekt-ooo-avtotor-holding/ (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Investments // Government of the Kaliningrad region. URL: https://gov39.ru/ekonomy/investicii.php (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Seregin Maxim. The Soviet pulp-and-paper plant died, forget about it. // Russian West. 04.04.2014. URL: http://ruwest.ru/blog/?page=post&amp;blog=max&amp;post_id=349 (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Data of the regional office of the Federal State Statistics Service in the Kaliningrad region.</li>
<li>Project of the state-run programme of the Russian Federation “Social and economic development of the Kaliningrad region”. P. 19 // Information agency «BigElectricPowerNews» URL:</li>
</ol>
<p>http://www.bigpowernews.ru/photos/0/0_4fLrlvQkJiY14LUBoEKxcXv61Xk3neBM.doc (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</p>
<ol>
<li>Federal State Statistics Service. Central statistic database. URL: http://www.gks.ru/dbscripts/cbsd/dbinet.cgi?pl=9420108 (Accessed 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Zhdanov V.P., Krasnyansky I.Yu., Paletskaya T.M. Assessment of the development of the types of economic activities in the Kaliningrad region in the WTO and termination of the transition period regarding the FEZ in 2016: Analytical reviews of the Russian Institute of Strategic Research. – M.: RISR, 2013. &#8211; #1(36). P. 13-36.</li>
<li>Order of the Government of the Russian Federation dated November 29, 2014, #1275 &#8220;On provision of other interbudget transfers from the federal budget to the budget of the Kaliningrad region to ensure support of juridical entities operating in the Kaliningrad region, and residents of the Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad region&#8221; // Rossijskaya gazeta. 3 December 2014. URL: http://www.rg.ru/2014/12/03/oez-site-dok.html (Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
<li>Science and technology park “Factory” // Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University. URL: <a href="http://www.kantiana.ru/innopark/">http://www.kantiana.ru/innopark/</a>(Accessed: 17.03.2015).</li>
</ol>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Yury Mikhailovich Zverev  &#8211; Candidate of Geographical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Geography, Nature and Spatial Development, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Kaliningrad.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>[1] Enshrined in the Federal Law FZ-13 &#8220;On the Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad Region&#8221; (1996) and extended by ten years till April 1, 2016, by the new Federal Law FZ-16 &#8220;On the Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad region and on amendments to some legislative acts of the Russian Federation&#8221;(2006).</p>
<p>[2] Set for the SEZ residents who started the implementation of investment projects with total capital investment of at least 150 million Rubles within a period not exceeding three years (since 2006 under the Federal Law FZ-16). Tax incentives contributed to the appearance of major investors in the region. At the beginning of November 2007, there were 47 residents of the SEZ with the declared sum investment of nearly 26 billion Rubles [8]. These are large industrial, construction and transport companies. The largest implemented investment project at that time was carried out by &#8220;Sodrujestvo Soya” CJSC near Svetly. It was the commissioning of one of Russia&#8217;s largest oil-extraction plants (processing of imported soybeans), combined with the marine terminal (2007).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://en.abfund.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1060</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
