Generolo Jono Žemaičio Lietuvos karo akademija

Our paper focuses on the issues of food security and agricultural trade. Specifically, we tackle the issue of economic selfsufficiency of a country using an example of the import ban on agricultural production as one form of economic sanctions. Our paper attempts to estimate the impact of sanctions in separate regions, rather then on the aggregate country level. We propose an original methodology of estimating allocation of import ban effects based on the OECD Customer Support Estimate (CSE). Our results demonstrate that in case of some agricultural products (e.g. potatoes) consumers in most of Russian regions were net beneficiaries before 2014, but the magnitude of the benefits decreased significantly after the introduction of sanctions. This provided Russian agricultural producers with more support arising from the market price differential. All in all, we find no significant evidence of the import ban impact, however after 2014 the cumulative cost paid by consumers in different regions declined significantly due to other factors, leaving consumers in the position of net beneficiaries. Our results demonstrate that despite the economic sanctions are important, they do not affect food security of neither of conflicting parties.

Security and competitiveness are two very important aspects of the economic and political development of every country. In the 21st century, one of the key drivers of most economies in countries throughout the world is energy. Different countries adopt different measures so as to ensure their security and competitiveness through the effective energy policies that make traditional and renewable resources adequately available hence eliminating the possibilities of shortages. Our paper takes up the case study of Germany as one of the wealthiest and most developed economies in the European Union which also occupies the first positions in the charts of energy uptake and consumption. German policy-makers realize its vulnerability when it comes to energy security and attempt to diversify its energy competitiveness using the renewable sources of energy (for instance via the adoption of the Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz or the “Renewable Energy Act” (EEG)). We analyze the issues of energy security and competitiveness of a country using an example of Germany. Moreover, we describe what challenges the renewable energy sources (RES) might bring into the conventional game and how this might influence the competitiveness and security.

Energy security is conditioned by numerous factors, among which solutions and patterns of energy storage play important role. Electrical energy storage (EES) is the process by which energy is stored from the power network to a form which can be used later when converted back to electrical energy. There are various ways by which electrical energy can be stored for future purposes. Nowadays, the electrical energy is mainly stored in pumped hydroelectric energy storage (PHES) that comprises about 99% of EES worldwide and the battery energy storage (BES) that uses chemical energy with both methods yielding characteristic advantages and disadvantages. Electrical energy is mainly stored when there is low demand and when there is high generation of power at low costs. The energy is then used when there is high demand of power and the generation cost is high or when there are no other means of generating electrical energy. Electrical energy storage has many uses such as in the electrical devices, motor vehicles and stationery energy resources and is gaining special attention with the widespread usage of renewable energy sources (RES).

Russian economic reforms of the 1990s triggered off the massive economic transformation that went hand in hand with worsening of the life prospects of the population, rising of unemployment, inflation, personal debts and creating social unrests among other security issues. The new economic perspectives offered by the free and open market created the previously unthinkable incentives for many people. Borrowing and lending became fully legal endeavors and the new economic order offered unprecedented opportunities and a variety of consumer goods and services that were previously unavailable. One of the outcomes of this process was the sharp increase in the number of debts and personal insolvency issues. It appears that many Russian citizens lacked the financial literacy and healthy judgement in their financial management that led to the problems of economic insolvency debt. This paper focuses on the issue of personal economic and financial security in Russian Federation. We analyze the available data before and after the economic crisis of the 2007-2009 and the recent sanctions to demonstrate the patterns of borrowing behavior of the Russians. Our results show that borrowing decreased in the recent months following the introduction of economic sanctions which can be explained by the overall feeling of uncertainty and the fear of economic collapse of various households. We argue that good financial literacy might increase the basic economic awareness and contribute to the better security in the everyday life in the Russian Federation.

Our paper tackles the issue of the European energy security and economic growth. Specifically, it evaluates the relationship between natural gas consumption and economic growth in the European Union (EU). Channels along which natural gas is supplied to the EU energy markets yield dependence from the Russian Federation which presents a threat to the European energy security. Our sample includes panel time series data over the period from 1997 to 2011 for a 26 EU countries. Based on neoclassical growth model, we create a multivariate model including gross fixed capital formation and total labor forces of a country as additional explanatory variables. Using panel cointegration tests, we found that there exists a long-run relationship between economic growth, natural gas consumption, labor and capital. In the short-run there is bidirectional causality between natural gas consumption and economic growth. The causality running from economic growth to natural gas consumption is positive. On the other hand, the causality, which runs from natural gas consumption to economic growth, is negative.