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).

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.
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.

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 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.

 

Introduction

“The shift to the sea” 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 “coastal zones” as specific socio-geographical phenomena; attempts have been made to identify and delimitate them. At the same time, formal geospatial criteria for a “coastal zone” (a direct “access” 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]).

A striking example of the renovation of the coastal zone, its “compressing” and “expansion” (as well as the overall “coastal factor” 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.

 

The port of Ust-Luga as the “pole” of the socio-economic activity in water and on land

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 “answer” 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.

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 – Germany), interprets it as a “geoeconomically active state using its geoeconomic power” [11].

 

Figure 1

Turnover growth dynamics, 2003-2014 (tonnes)

Compiled based on [12]

 

Currently, the port of Ust-Luga (with a turnover of 75.7 million tonnes in 2014 – 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 – 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:

1. “Rosterminalugol” JSC (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);
2. “Universal Handling Facility” LLC (design capacity – 3 million tonnes; the terminal specializes in receiving, storage and shipment for export (import) of general and bulk cargo, including – cast iron ingots, coal, nonferrous metals, bulk goods);
3. “European sulfur terminal” JSC (design capacity – 9 million tonnes per year; sulfur comes by rail from Orenburg and Astrakhan);
4. “Baltic fertilizer terminal” LLC(Transshipment of general cargo and fertilizers with the capacity of over 5 million tonnes);
5. “Ust-Luga Oil” JSC (employing 600 people; the design capacity – 30 million tonnes of oil products per year, of which 20 million tonnes – dark oil products and 10 million tonnes – light petroleum products; the tank farm provides storage for 960000 m³ 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);
6. “Spetsmornefteport” LLC (LLC “Transneft – Port of Ust-Luga” 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 “Baltic Pipeline System – 2″ (BPS-2));
7.         “Neva Pipeline Company” LLC (provides handling of up to 30 million tonnes of Russian oil for export);

8.         “Commercial sea port Ust-Luga” JSC (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);

9.         North-Western Basin Branch of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Rosmorport” (servicing terminal for the port activity);

1.       “Ust-Luga Container Terminal” JSC (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]);
2. “Sibur-Portenergo” LLC (subsidiary of “SIBUR Holding” 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);
3. “NOVATEK Ust-Luga” LLC (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);

13.       Forest Terminal “Factor” JSC (has a timber transshipment capacity of about 290 thousand m³/tonnes with the prospect of handling pallets up to 400 thousand tonnes per year);

4.       “Terminal New Haven” LLC (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);

15.       “SmartBalk Terminal” LLC (a joint venture of “FosAgro” JSC and “Ultramar” 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).

 

Additionally, the “Baltic ferry” project has been launched in Ust-Luga. This is a railway-car ferry line Ust-Luga – Baltiysk – 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).

Currently, there are three vessels operating on the ferry line Ust-Luga – Baltiysk – 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 – 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.

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].

The decision of “Gazprom” JSC to build the “Baltic LNG plant” 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’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 m³. It is expected that the construction phase will provide about 4,000 job vacancies [15].

As part of the development of the industrial zone “Ust-Luga”, there has started development of the project for production of ammonia and carbamide – “Baltic carbamide plant” LLC (near the village of Vistino) of the group of companies “East” 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 “Ust-Luga”. 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 “Kohtla-Järve – Leningrad”, the reconstruction of which is incorporated in the plans of “Gazprom”. The terminal complex and a carbamide plant will be connected by a corridor of communications [16]. An ammonia plant for 700 thousand tonnes,ownedby”EvroChim” JSC,should become an important part of the port and industrial complex.

The already built and planned port terminals, as well as production capacities near the port designed for construction are a strong “pole” 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.

 

The main local socio-economic effects of the “compressing” and “expansion” of the coastal zone

The variety of regions and territories determines various models of social and economic development. Situation factors significantly adjust such development and expand the “corridor” of opportunities. At the same time, the economic, geographical and geo-economic situation is no longer a “destiny”: 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.

As O.A. Kuznetsova rightly notices, “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 “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 “([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.

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 – 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].

The most striking positive social and economic situation in the district is reflected by its considerable migration attractiveness (Table 1).

Table 1

Population migration in Kingisepp District and in certain areas of Leningrad Oblast (2011-2014) *

District	District population in 2011 (thousand people)	Indicator (people)	2011	2012	2013	2014
Lomonosov District	64689	Arrived	1398	1924	2658	2480
		Left	1230	1803	2196	2621
		Change	168	121	462	-141
Luzhsky District	78284	Arrived	2264	2791	2761	3139
		Left	1771	2547	2925	2658
		Change	493	244	-164	481
Kingisepp District	78329	Arrived	2808	3032	3574	3746
		Left	1446	2471	2705	3405
		Change	1362	561	869	341
Tosnensky District	123188	Arrived	6023	7758	7825	8359
		Left	2307	3795	5432	6594
		Change	3716	3963	2393	1765
Gatchinsky District	233682	Arrived	9589	11933	12660	13236
		Left	4280	6823	8516	10021
		Change	5309	5110	4144	3215
Vsevolozhsky District	261145	Arrived	11244	16911	21627	25072
		Left	4855	8002	9619	13406
		Change	6389	8909	12008	11666

*Compiled based on [22]

 

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].

 

Figure 2

Compiled based on [22]

(Награфике):

Structure of the migration balance in Leningrad Oblast in 2013

Vyborgsky District

Priozersky District

Vsevolozhsky District

Kingisepp District

Slanzevsky District

Luzhsky District

Volosovsky District

Sosnovy Bor

Lomonosovsky District

Gatchinsky District

Tosnensky District

Kirovsky District

Kirishsky District

Volkhovsky District

Tikhvinsky District

Boksitogorsky District

Lodeinopolsky District

Podporozhsky District

 

General migration balance

Migration structure of Kingisepp District:

International

Interregional

Intraregional

 

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).

Table 2

Social and economic potential of Kingisepp district compared to some similar territories*

Territory	Population, people, 2015	Area, km2	Population density, person per km2	GDP per person (euro)	GRP, mln euro, 2012	Main port
Kingisepp District (Russian Federation)	79647	2907	27,20	7423	810	Ust-Luga(78 mln tonnes)
Kymenlaakso (Finland)	180900	5148	35,24	32095	5806	Kotka-Hamina (13,41 mln tonnes)
Ostvorpommern (Germany)	105036	1899	55,00	16975	1783	Rostock(21,1 mln tonnes)
Klaipeda District (Lithuania)	333000	5209	63,93	12613	4200	Klaipeda(35,2 mln tonnes)
Kurzeme (Latvia)	301621	13596	22,20	6153	1856	Ventspils(30,4 mln tonnes)

* compiled by the authors based on [12, 23]

 

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 “point” 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 “coastal” settlement.

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 “Phosphorit” was downsized), which occurred in 2003-2008.

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 – 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 “Karat”, Residential Complex “Yamburg-City”, Residential Complex “Yamburg”, Residential Complex “Prestige”, 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.

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.

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).

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 – 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 “Training center of Leningrad Oblast”, aimed at preparation of dock workers, sling operators, crane operators, engine drivers, technicians, boiler facility operators and of other technical professions.

 

Prospects of transport and logistics and port and industrial activity in Kingisepp District in the new geoeconomic reality

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 – 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: “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-, “green” technologies); and finally, industries of former technological structures – 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!” (Cited from [24]).

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, “Hyundai Manufacturing RUS”, 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.

Many other manufacturers of Saint-Petersburg and Leningrad Oblast are also expanding their export potential.

In 2014, export earnings of the company “Nokian Tyres” 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, “Hyundai Manufacturing RUS” LLC for the first time achieved its export earnings of 650 million USD, and “Atomproekt” JSC (“Rosatom” SC) increased its indicators up to 470 million USD [26]. In 2015, the “Siemens Gas Turbine Technologies” 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.

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 – 2.6%). The port of Ust-Luga also has a priority position for its support.

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.

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 “One Belt, One Road” (“New Silk Road”), 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.

 

About the authors:

A.G. Druzhinin – Doctor of Geography, Professor, Director of the Northern-Caucasian Research Institute of Economic and Social Problems of the South Federal University.

 

S.S. Lachininskii – 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.

 

 

 

List of References:

 

1. Reviving the Ocean Economy: the case for action – 2015. WWF International, Gland, Switzerland, Geneva, 60 pp.
2. Cowen Deborah, Neil Smith after Geopolitics? From the Geopolitical Social to Geo-economics // Antipode.  – 2009. – vol. 41. – № 1. – pp 22–48.
3. Commission on Marine Science Engineering and Resources. Our nation and The sea: a plan for national action. Washington: US Government Printing Office; 1969
4. Humphrey S, Burbridge P. 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.
5. Sal’nikov S.S. Jekonomicheskaja geografija okeana – novoe perspektivnoe napravlenie jekonomicheskoj i social’noj geografii // Sovetskaja geografija. L., 1984. – S. 231–243.
6. Slevich S.B. Okean: resursy i hozjajstvo [Tekst] / S. B. Slevich. – L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1988. – 189 s.
7. Bezrukov L.A. Kontinental’no-okeanicheskaja dihotomija v mezhdunarodnom i regional’nom razvitii. Novosibirsk: Akademicheskoe izdatel’stvo «Geo», 2008. – 369 s.
8. Green Paper. Towards a Future Maritime Policy for the Union: a European Vision for the Ocean. CEC. Brussels. 7.6.2006. COM (2006) 275 final.
9. The Role of Maritime Clusters to Enhance the Strength and Development of Maritime Sectors // European Commission Website. 2009. URL: http://ec.europa.eu /maritimeaffairs/pdf/clusters
10. 10.Druzhinin A.G. Jekonomicheskij potencial primorskoj zony: ponjatijno-kategorial’nye osnovy koncepcii // Izvestija vuzov. Severo-Kavkazskij region. Obshhestvennye nauki – 2004. – №4. – S.54-60.
11. Hans Kundnani Germany as a geoeconomic Power // The Washington Quarterly, 2011, pp. 31-45.
12. URL://.russianports.ru/index.html (date of accses: 28.08.2015 г.)
13. URL://ria.ru/economy/20150625/1087711156.html (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.)
14. Houston: Energy Powerhouse. URL: //www.houston.org/assets/pdf/opportunity/Energy-Data-Sheet.pdf (Accessed on: 11.03.2015 28.08.2015 г.)
15. URL://forumtek.ru/press-centre/industry-news/industry-news_276.html (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.).
16. The National Rating Agency. URL//www.ra-national.ru/press_release/55482/277496 (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.)
17. 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
18. Kuznecova O. A. Piramida faktorov social’no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija regionov // Voprosy jekonomiki. 2013. № 2. S. 121—131.
19. Artobolevskij S.S. Tochka zrenija: Rossijskaja regional’naja politika: modernizacija ili deformacija prostranstva // Sovremennye proizvoditel’nye sily. M., SOPS, 2012, s.82-85.
20. Doklad glavy administracii MO «Kingiseppskij rajon» V.Je. Geshele na soveshhanii po itogam social’no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija Kingiseppskogo rajona v 2014 g. i zadacham na 2015 g. URL:// http://www.kingisepplo.ru/documents/ dokladi_glavi.htm
21. Doklad glavy administracii MO «Kingiseppskij municipal’nyj rajon» na soveshhanii po itogam social’no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija  v 2011 g. i zadacham na 2012 g. URL://www.kingisepplo.ru/documents/dokladi_glavi2012.htm
22. Bazy dannyh municipal’nyh obrazovanij-2013. St. sbornik. – M.: Goskomstat Rossii – Rosstat, 2014 g.База Евростата-2011-2014 гг. URL: // ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/regions /data/database
23. Эксперт №25 (856) от 21.06.2013, URL://expert.ru/expert/2013/25 /konsensus-ne-dostignut/ (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.)
24. Rossijskaja gazeta. URL://www.rg.ru/2015/08/25/hyundai-site.html (Accessed on: 28.08.2015 г.).
25. URL://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.)
26. Federal’naja sluzhba po voenno-tehnicheskomu sotrudnichestvu RF, OAO «Rosoboronjeksport»
27. URL://portnews.ru/news/205305 /( Accessed on: 31.08.2015 г.)

 

[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.

Vyatkin Kirill Sergeyevich — Ph.D., Amber Bridge Fund, Head of the Berlin office. 

Recently Germany has been more clearly indicating growing interest towards the Arctic region. It is determined by a number of political and economic processes in the modern world, occurring against lack of study of the dynamics of climate changes on the planet. The article analyzes the most important factors specifying the interests of Germany in the Arctic; it examines the potential opportunities and a set of tools at the disposal of German policy to achieve its goals; it assesses the nature and degree of involvement of Germany in the process of international cooperation in the Arctic area. Special attention is given to forecasts of further development of Germany in the Arctic project, including international development.

 

As it is known, Germany is among the countries that do not have direct access to the coast of the Arctic Ocean and, therefore, does not have legal rights to the independent development of the Arctic shelf. Its location is not close to the Arctic Circle and doesn’t have sovereign territories in the Arctic[1].

However, in November 2013, Federal Republic of Germany adopted a document entitled “Guidelines for German policy in the Arctic” [4], which largely explains the renewed interest of Germany to the region.

ARCTIC “MAGNIT” OR GERMAN INTERESTS IN THE ARCTIC

First of all, like most other countries outside the region, the Arctic attracts Germany with its immense hydrocarbon reserves. According to some foreign estimates (which, however, generally refer to the US Geological Survey data [6]), it may contain about a quarter of undiscovered deposits of hydrocarbons in the world. While the proportion of the Arctic in global oil resources is relatively small (less than 7 percent), the amount of gas resources is considered to be much more significant – about 25 percent or more[2].

As an alternative to nuclear power (and the trip of the last reactor is scheduled to 2022) Germany today is focusing on priority development of the so-called “renewable” energy sources – solar, wind, biological and so on. So far, however, even optimistic adherents of “green energy” provide long-term forecasts. So it seems clear that in the short and medium term Germany is likely to increase the consumption of traditional energy resources – oil, gas and coal. Therefore no wonder that the Arctic hydrocarbon reserves and the ways of its transportation are in the center of attention of political Berlin.

Secondly, the Arctic region possesses (again, mostly presumably) considerable reserves of rare metals, minerals, ores and other raw materials of strategic importance. This category, in particular, includes estimated deposit apatite, nickel, cobalt, copper, tungsten, titanium, chromium, manganese, platinum group metals, tin, mercury, gold, silver, diamond and so on. An important feature of a number of known nickel deposits is integrated ore composition, allowing – in the presence of appropriate technology, that Germany has – simultaneously remove additional amount of copper, platinum group of metals, gold, silver, selenium and tellurium. It dramatically increases the value of the ore, despite the high cost of extraction and production in the Arctic Circle [1, Volume 1, p. 126].

Thirdly, the Arctic attracts Germany, as well as other European countries, with its biological resources. The Arctic Ocean is the habitat to more than four hundred unique species of fish and animals. It is home of important species for European fisheries, namely, herring, cod, salmon, flatfish and others.

Fourthly, the Arctic is the area of ​​emerging international transport corridors. In case positive forecasts are right (what happens sometimes), one can expect a lot of new opportunities for further development. When it comes to sea routes, one obviously means the Northern Sea Route (NSR), which runs near the Arctic coast of Russia, and the so-called Northwest Passage, located along the northern coast of Canada. Assuming the continuation of melting ice NSR is likely to become a major transport artery of world importance that will significantly reduce the shipping routes between Europe and Asia-Pacific region[3].

Finally, fifthly, Germany, and many other countries of the world are concerned about global climate change, which is believed to have a direct impact on the environment, economic activities, public health. That is why the monitoring of the climatic situation in the Arctic is of primary importance for the scientific community of Germany. For these purposes the country has already created and successfully launched a number of institutions involved in research in polar regions, including environmental monitoring in the Arctic and Antarctica.

INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

The mechanism of the formation and implementation of the Arctic policy in Germany is quite efficient. Traditionally, the main coordinating role in this important political direction is done by the Office of the Federal Chancellor. Four departments – Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Education and Research and Ministry of Economy and Energy are responsible for practical implementation of the basic provisions of the above-mentioned political strategy.

The lead operator for the preparation and conduct of research studies in various regions, including the Arctic region, is the Federal Agency for Geosciences and Mineral Resources (BGR), which is subordinated to the Ministry of Economy and Energy.

One of the main activities of the agency in the Arctic is the study of geodynamic processes in the coastal regions of the Arctic water areas. In this regard, since 1992 the agency has been implementing a multi-year international program CASE (Circum-Arctic Structural Events) [7]. During the reporting period over 15 major research (with a focus on geological and geophysical surveys) expeditions to Svalbard, northern Greenland, the Canadian Arctic and polar regions of Siberia were organized within the program[4].

Since all lands in the Arctic area (ie located to the north of the 66th latitude), as well as adjacent offshore areas are under the territorial sovereignty of well-known five states – members of the Arctic Council, German authorities strictly and consistently adhere to the principle of prior consultation with the countries concerning their programs of scientific and practical studies, which are usually held on the terms of cooperation.

Thus, BGR works on Svalbard are conducted in cooperation with the Norwegian Polar Institute. With respect to Greenland, which is under the sovereignty of Denmark, BGR cooperates with the Geological Service of Greenland in Copenhagen. Project in Canada is implemented within a multi-year program of scientific and technical cooperation (WTZ) between two countries. The main partners from the Canadian side are the Geological Service of Canada and the University of Laval / Quebec. The partners of BGR in the Urals in the frame of the same program[5]are institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow and Syktyvkar (Komi Republic).

“Siberian” part of the project is a priority for BGR. Among its most important exploratory tasks in the Arctic region, in particular, are:

-              a range of issues related to the possible continental extension and access mid-ocean ridge of the Arctic Ocean on the mainland of Siberia;

-              potential of Laptev Sea bed in terms of mineral (especially hydrocarbon) resources;

-              potential of polar Urals in terms of chromite and platinum group elements[6];

-              the phenomenon of permafrost and its resource potential; dynamics in this sector and its impact on the processes of climate change on the planet[7].

Thus, in 2001-2003 in the framework of the aforementioned program for scientific and technical cooperation (WTZ) with Russian Federation BGR implemented the project PURE (Polar Urals Expedition), by carrying out three geological expeditions to polar Urals. Long-awaited expedition to New Siberian islands[8] organized in 2011 as part of the program CASE-13 was considered a great success of BGR. The first phase associated with marine geophysical work in Laptev Sea, was finished in the mid-1990s (in cooperation with Murmansk Institute Sevmorneftegeofizika).

The next stage (project CASE-3, 1998), aimed at carrying out complementary geological studies on land, ended in a relative failure. It is essential that the year of default was not the best for polar research in Russia. Extremely unfavorable weather conditions in that year, huge problems in logistics, supply and financial support caused the premature cessation of work.

The subsequent adjustment of the political and economic course of our country, fundamental change in approach towards the Arctic allowed to provide favorable conditions for mutually beneficial international cooperation. The result of intensive and fruitful cooperation between BGR and a number of Russian institutions (the main partner – A.P. Karpinsky Russian Geological Research Institute in St. Petersburg) was the success of obtaining unique scientific data during the international expedition CASE-13 in 2011. Scientists not only from Russia and Germany, but also from France, Britain, Italy and Sweden took part in that project.

Starting from 2015 German Ministry for Education and Research is implementing the third framework program “Research for Sustainable Development» (FONA-3). The Arctic region is one of the key regions of the studies held in the framework of this program. Annually the Ministry allocates an average of about 20 million euros to support research projects in the Arctic. In general, Germany invests around 200 million euros per year in polar and marine research [8].

Among the research institutions of Germany dealing with Arctic issues, the main is undoubtedly Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), located in the north of Germany in Bremerhaven town. The Institute is one of 18 major research centers united in the Helmholtz Society. It has about 780 employees, including 450 scientists, employed on a permanent basis, what means a lot for the German standards. The annual budget of the institute amounts to 60 million euros. 90% of the funding comes from the Ministry of Education and Research.

AWI Institute has three departments:

-              Research Center in Potsdam

-              Biological Institute Helgoland[9]

-              Wadden Seastation Sylt [10]

In 1992 in accordance with the recommendations of the Scientific Council of the federal government, a research unit of the Institute AWI was opened in Potsdam in order to preserve the practices and scientific potential of the former GDR in geophysics and polar research. Today its main activities are focused on geophysical surveys in regions of permafrost, as well as experimental studies of atmospheric processes in the polar regions (primarily in areas of permafrost in Siberia and Svalbard). Scientists from “climate science»[11] department explore physical and chemical processes in the system “ocean – ice – atmosphere” and its importance for the development of the global climate. Working groups are engaged in studies of regional and large-scale circulation system and physical and chemical processes in the atmosphere. Current research in this area covers various topics, including influence of clouds and sea ice in the energy exchange between the ocean and the atmosphere, circulation of water masses in polar regions, study of natural climate change and modeling of atmospheric circulation in the Arctic.

A distinctive feature of the Research Center in Potsdam is a close scientific and practical cooperation with the university centers in Brandenburg state, and a number of other federal states. Well-organized system of scientific exchange and cooperation with partners in the universities of Berlin (Technical, Free, Humboldt), Potsdam (University of Brandenburg), Erlangen (Bavaria), Hamburg, Bremen, Kiel (Schleswig-Holstein), Trier (North Rhine-Westphalia) is designed to stimulate the flow of new knowledge and to ensure continuity, including personnel, in the area of ​​polar research.

The Research Center is focused also on two research areas – «Earth Science» and «Biological sciences». Within «Earth Science» scientists reconstruct changes that have taken place in the past. Scientists from Bremerhaven, Potsdam and Sylt study the effect of occurring earlier processes on the climate development. They study the structure of oceanic sediments, surface deposits, polar ice caps. In particular, they analyze composition and distribution of marine sediments, material and energy flows in areas of permafrost and changes in the structure of the crust and polar ice sheets.

«Biological sciences» (which is the main focus of research scientists from Biological Institute Helgoland) cover environmental, physiological and ecotoxicological issues. Particular attention is paid to the study of processes in offshore and coastal zone of the North Sea. Research subjects include reaction of cells, organisms, populations and communities to external influence and organization and dynamics of populations, communities and ecosystems.

Scientists from AWI Institute often conduct research in the high seas or directly in the ice of Arctic and Antarctica. They have stations AWIPEV[12]  (Svalbard, 79 ° N) and “Samoylovsky” (island Samoylovsky in the delta of the Lena River, 72 ° N).

As of 1998 island Samoylovsky locates a base for field research. In 2013 it was completely renovated to become a modern well-equipped Arctic research station. Initially the main organizers were AWI Institute from German side and Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute of Roshydromet (at the federal level) and Melnikov Permafrost Institute of the Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences (at regional level) from Russian side. Currently the station is on the balance of the Institute of Petroleum-Gas Geology and Geophysics of the Siberian Branch of the RAS (Novosibirsk) and is a part of the Arctic Centre, specially created in the institute. It should be emphasized that the whole station was built and equipped with Russian assets, the German side only finances the work of their representatives.

«Experimental Station on island Samoylovsky» is one of three projects (two others – «Global change in the seas of Eurasian Arctic shelf: frontal zones and polynyas in the Laptev Sea» and «Otto Schmidt Laboratory for Polar and Marine Research (OSHL)»), which are part of a large-scale Russian-German program «Laptev Sea System». In turn, the project «Laptev Sea System» is a branch of the Russian-German program «Trans-system of the Arctic Ocean» (Transdrift) and can rightly be regarded as «longevity» and one of the most successful ventures in the history of Russian-German joint research in high latitudes of Arctic.

In addition, Institute AWI incorporates year-round functioning German station Neumayer-3 (71 ° S) as well as Kohnen Station (75 ° S) and laboratory Dallman (68 ° S) in Antarctica. The stations in Arctic and Antarctic carry out meteorological and geophysical measurements all year round.

The main mobile research platform is icebreaker «Polarstern» («Polar Star», in fact being the only icebreaker in Germany)[13]. At the same time it carries out a close international cooperation – about a quarter of the members of the expedition on «Polarstern» are traditionally foreign researchers. In addition, the Institute operates five research vessels to work in temperate latitudes, and two polar aircrafts Polar 5 and Polar 6.

In addition to fundamental and applied scientific research institute AWI also provides coordination and advisory services. Particular attention is paid to biological monitoring, science and technology, infrastructure and logistics support for polar research in Germany, as well as advising the Government of Germany.

In April 2015 a delegation of German politicians and scientists led by the Minister for Education and Research Johanna Vank visited Svalbard. The program of the visit included a visit of a number of German and international research centers.

One of the aims of the visit was a visit to the Norwegian settlement of Ny-Alesund, which is the world’s most northern permanent public settlement. Here is located the world’s most northern permanent civil research station. Researchers from Norway (who has administrative control over then territory), Germany, France and China permanently work there. On a temporary basis the station is visited by scientists from Italy, Britain, Netherlands and Japan. In addition, the politicians got acquainted with the activities of the research station of the Institute AWI, which now operates in a joint German-French-format (AWIPEV).

In general we can say that polar research in Germany is based on an extensive network of public and private institutions that coordinate financial, scientific and practical activities in this area. Ministry of Economy and Energy and Ministry of Education and Research provide primarily institutional support. In addition, Ministry of Education and Research conducts targeted support of research projects in the Arctic.

Since the beginning of the 1990s the German Research Foundation (DFG)[14]actively supports polar research. In 1992 the Presidium of the company established the Special Committee SCAR / IASC (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research / International Arctic Science Committee), whose tasks include planning and coordination of scientific and practical activities of German universities and university centers with institute AWI and relevant government departments in the field of polar research. Currently, with the support of DFG on the basis of a number of German universities functions an interdisciplinary program of comparative research in Antarctica and Arctic (in 2012 the program has been extended until 2018).

Some more specialized projects for the Arctic are conducted with the participation of the institutions of Max Planck Society, Leibniz Association. Finally, the most important instrument in terms of interdisciplinary coordination and cooperation is the German Society of Polar Research (DGP) that brings together representatives of various scientific disciplines.

POLITICAL ORIENTATION

Obviously, in the foreseeable future Germany will continue the policy of further strengthening of “indirect voting rights” in its Arctic affairs, primarily relying on their undoubted achievements in the field of research and scientific practice. With good expertise in qualified scientific works, as well as solid financial, technical and technological potential for further development, Germany intends to use expert assessments to influence political decision-making, relating to the Arctic.

In this regard, Germany, for example, appreciates the opportunities for cooperation in the framework of the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC). Secretariat of the Committee is based in the branch of the Institute AWI in Potsdam, and the Executive Secretary of it is the authoritative German expert on Arctic F. Rahold. IASC members are national scientific organizations. Germany is represented by the aforementioned German Research Foundation DFG.

Executive Director of the International Association on permafrost (IPA) is held by a German (an employee of the Institute AWI K. Schollen). At the same time, Germany has been active in the European Polar Board (European Polar Board). As a division of the European Science Foundation (European Science Foundation, ESF), it is an important platform for the coordination of polar research between interested countries – EU members. The German experience in the field of polar research has formed the basis of the relevant areas within the next 8-th EU program for research, covering the period 2014-2020.[15]

The specificity of the German Arctic strategy lies in the emphasis on the environmental consequences of industrial development in the Arctic. If desired, one can discern the intention of the international community to form a negative attitude towards any attempt to operate Arctic resources without the use of special “green” technologies. In an effort to ensure high standards of environmental safety as international standards, Berlin, obviously is trying to secure for its own (and European) companies more favorable conditions for the promotion to the Arctic.

At the same time it should be noted, that Germany is quite realistic regarding its competitive opportunities in several areas. For example, Germany so far has only one relatively large oil and gas company operating on an international scale – Wintershall. Concerning the Arctic, its strategic focus is the development of offshore fields in Norway.

However, the company has been recently gradually consolidating its position as one of the largest producers of gas on the Norwegian continental shelf. A subsidiary of the BASF concern has successfully established itself as an integrated enterprise in the field of exploration and production. One of the backgrounds of its growth is its rich portfolio of licenses. Wintershall is one of the largest license holders on the Norwegian continental shelf: it has about 50 licenses, over half of which endows it with the rights of the operator works. Most recently, in January 2015, the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy of Norway issued the company 8 new licenses, giving great prospects. Yet it must be acknowledged that the scope of its activities is not up to a level comparable with world known giants of oil and gas industry.

Obviously, in the foreseeable future Germany will stop its Arctic ambitions by concentrating on production of renewable resources (fish and seafood) as well as on the exploitation of the Northern Sea Route[16]. In this regard, it would be appropriate to recall that Germany has the largest fleet of containerships in the world, therefore it should be interested in the development of new transport communications. Besides, it is an additional opportunity for the development of the national shipbuilding industry. Thus, in December 2012, the Federal Agency of Sea and River Transport of Russia and the German company «Nordic Yards» signed a state contract for the construction of two multipurpose salvage vessels with capacity of 7 MW, designed to work in the Russian Arctic. The total amount of orders amounted to 150 mln Eur. The ships were transferred to the Russian side in time and became part of its fleet at the beginning of the year[17].

Germany is likely to leave the development of the access to the region’s energy resources to its partners – Norway and Russia. Berlin is satisfied with the role of the distributor of Russian raw materials on the world market.

Most of German experts are rather skeptic regarding the thesis that the “Arctic is growing potential conflict,” and that predicted by some researchers conflicts in the Arctic will be conflicts over access to hydrocarbon resources. [2] The extent of the reserves in the region, mostly widespread in pseudo-scientific circles, is greatly exaggerated. German experts (in particular, from BGR) are more careful about such estimations. According to them, data on stocks, which are now provided by different sources, are very approximate – primarily due to poor knowledge of the region. For the time being it’s mostly forecasts. Proved reserves are significantly low[18].

It is also noted that in order to assess the potential for conflict in the northern polar regions it is important, that almost all estimated hydrocarbon reserves of the Arctic are concentrated in the exclusive economic zones of coastal States, ie within their undisputed jurisdiction. The central part of the Arctic Ocean, which could theoretically meet claims of coastal states over the continental shelf, is of little promise in search for hydrocarbon resources[19].

In other words, there is simply no reason for the emergence of a new «arms race» in the region[20]. It is significant that the participants of the last annual Security Conference in Munich (February 2015) did not discuss the current situation and its development in the Arctic – apparently due to lack of reasonable forecast expectations for the foreseeable future acute conflict situations in the region.

It entirely corresponds to the estimates from defense authorities of Germany. For example, published in July 2014 analytical study «Climate Change and Security in the Arctic after 2014″ prepared by planning department of Bundeswehr concludes that a widespread and military interstate conflict in the Far North is unlikely to happen. Even in the context of the ongoing melting of ice the Arctic will remain quite stable region for Germany, having nevertheless increasing economic and environmental value. In light of this, German security policy will primarily face the task of a comprehensive and long-term-oriented monitoring of the situation in the region [3, S.24]. For the process to be monitored and analysed one can attribute, for example, political dynamics associated with the autonomy of Greenland (which, in turn, could lead to the transformation of the «Arctic» status of Denmark), or increased political activity in the Arctic Council of «observers» among Asian countries (mainly China and Japan).

Sharing the opinion of the majority of Russian, Norwegian, Canadian experts, German experts say that today the military are able to fully ensure the safety and protection for civilian use such a wayward region as Arctic. However, they note that there is currently no need for additional support of Arctic forces of German partners in NATO with forces and means of Bundeswehr. Improving capacity and operational capabilities of German armed forces in Arctic is neither today nor in foreseeable future a priority of the development [3, S.25].

 

 

List of References

1. Аrkticheskij region: problemy mezhdunarodnogo sotrudnichestva. Khrestomatiya v 3-х tt. Izdatelstvo RSMD. М., 2013.
2. Corinna Röver, Katrin Ridder-Strolis, «Nachhaltigkeit in der Arktis: Prämissen, Probleme und Potentiale». Länderberichte der Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V. Oktober 2014.
3. Klimawandel und Sicherheit in der Arktis nach 2014. Hat die friedliche und kooperative internationale Arktispolitik eine langfristige Zukunft? Planungsamt der Bundeswehr, Dezernat Zukunftsanalyse. Juli 2014.
4. Leitlinien deutscher Arktispolitik. Verantwortung übernehmen, Chancen nutzen. Auswärtiges Amt, November 2013.
5. Nichtstaatliche Konflikte in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Planungsamt der Bundeswehr, Dezernat Zukunftsanalyse. Future Study 2012.
6. United States Geological Survey. URL: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1980#.VWRhOEa8xip
7. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe. URL: http://www.bgr.bund.de/DE/Themen/Polarforschung/Arktis/Expeditionen/expeditionen_node.html

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. URL: http://www.bmbf.de/de/26677.php

 

[1] Perhaps Svalbard archipelago may be a specific exception, the territory of which is under sovereignty of Norway. Since 1925 Germany is a party to the Paris Treaty on Spitsbergen of 1920, which provides that parties equal rights to exploit natural resources of Svalbard and its territorial waters

[2]See f.e.: http://polpred.com/?ns=1&ns_id=1159650&searchtext= or

http://www.zeit.de/wissen/2015-05/arktis-klimawandel-erderwaermung-eisschmelze-rohstoffe

 

[3] With a relatively favorable ice and weather conditions taking NSR from the German Hamburg to Japanese Yokohama could make only about 6,600 nautical miles, while through Suez Canal – 11 400 miles. Accordingly, the transportation time of cargo could be reduced to 40%. [5,S.26].

[4] Indeed, regions (and hence organizations) of United States are not present in this list.

[5] It is based on an agreement on scientific and technical cooperation (WTZ), which was signed by Germany and Soviet Union in 1987, subsequently was subject to repeated amendments and additions, in particular, during German-Russian intergovernmental consultations in July 2009.

[6] This area is of particular interest to Russia because after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it lost access to the largest in the USSR deposits of chrome ore in Kazakhstan.

[7] In this case, the Germans seem to be “engaged” in a very promising process. The fact is that as long as the Americans are developing shale gas, the world begins to develop a much more substantial reserves of “blue fuel”, which, in compressed form – so-called gas hydrates – are stored in the permafrost on the seabed and on land. According to the Russian Ministry of Energy (2013), reserves of gas hydrates are more than twice of the total reserves of shale and conventional natural gas. Russia has large deposits of natural hydrates found in areas of permafrost in Yakutia and West Siberia. Large reserves are discovered on the Sakhalin shelf in the Okhotskoye Sea (in particular in the area of ​​the east coast), and the Kuril Islands (which, by the way, is so eager to get Japan).

[8] New Siberian Islands – Russian archipelago in the Arctic Ocean, located between the Laptev Sea and East Siberian Sea.

[9] Helgoland – German-owned archipelago located in the Bay of Heligoland in the south-east of the North Sea.

[10] Sylt – Germany’s largest island in the North Sea, which is part of the waters of the Wadden Sea; since 1927 the island connected to the mainland by a causeway.

[11] This area is part of one of the six areas of basic research, on which Helmholtz Societyis concentrated: Energy, Earth and Environment, Health, Aeronautics, Space and Transport, Key Technologies, Structure of Matter.

[12] The base is named after Carl Koldewey, in honour of the head of the first German polar expedition in 1868. It was founded in Germany in August 1991 as a base of the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), and in 2003 it merged with the base of the French Institute Paul Emile Victor (IPEV).

[13]The construction of the new multi-polar vessel, which should replace the current ship carrying “scientific watch” since 1983 is planned by the end of 2019.

[14] The Foundation is the central organization for promotion of research in Germany. It operates on the principles of self-government and is organized on the basis of civil law. Its main task is research funding of universities and public research institutions of Germany. The Foundation itself is financed mainly at the expense of federal and state governments.

[15]http://www3.uni-bonn.de/forschung/euroconsult/8.-frp

[16] It should, however, added that in these areas Germany prefers cautious forecasts. For example, regarding the NSR it is noted that severe weather conditions and unpredictable ice conditions will remain for the foreseeable future dependence of marine transportation vessels of icebreakers and, most importantly, trained personnel, what in financial terms largely eliminates the possible gains from reducing the distance and travel time. Therefore transarctic container transport (especially those which are carried out on an urgent basis “just-in-time”) are not a short thing of the future.

Equally uncertain (and in fact, simply unexplored) remain assessments as to whether the result of the temporary exemption of ocean space from ice is to expand commercial fish habitat and thus will lead to an increase in their populations.

[17]Being a class of Icebreaker 6, the vessels may conduct rescue operations in difficult conditions. They can be used for icebreaking operations in port and at sea in the thickness of the ice up to 1 meter, extinguish fires on floating objects and coastal oil spill.

[18]F.e., opinion of expert of BGRG.Elsner in: http://www.zeit.de/wissen/2015-05/arktis-klimawandel-erderwaermung-eisschmelze-rohstoffe/seite-2

[19]Expert BGRK. Reihert, the same source.

[20] In particular, experts of authoritative German Foundation for Science and Policy, acting as a leading consulting center for the government of Germany, followed in their assessments this line. See: http://www.swp-berlin.org/publikationen/kurz-gesagt/arktische-kooperation-trotz-europaeischen-frosts.html