A Phased Strategy for Opening Armenia’s Western Border Armenian International Policy Research Group Torosyan, Gagnidze, Beilock.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Jacek Cukrowski Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Advisor, UNDP, Europe and the CIS Bratislava Regional Centre Aid for Trade (AfT) Needs Assessment.
Advertisements

1 Antonio Soria Head of Unit Economics of Energy, Climate Change and Transport Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Joint Research Centre European.
Potential and prospects of strengthening transport connectivity in South and South-West Asia Nagesh Kumar.
International student movements and the effects of barriers to trade in higher education services Dr Philippa Dee Crawford School of Economics and Government.
CHARLENE FITZGERALD APRIL 3, 2012 ROADS AND STREETS Yuma Metropolitan Planning Organization.
Institute for Transport Studies FACULTY OF EARTH AND ENVIRONMENT VERTICAL SEPARATION OF RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE - DOES IT ALWAYS MAKE SENSE? Jeremy Drew.
 «South Caucasus Railway» CJSC The perspectives of Armenia’s and South Caucasus Railway Integration into the Eurasian Transport System.
International E-Conference on Economy under Sanctions 22 September 2013 THE IMPACT OF SANCTIONS ON IRAN'S TOURISM Banafsheh M. Farahani and Maryam Shabani.
Assessing the Impact of Preferential Trade Agreements: A Disaggregated Approach Economics Brown Bag Series Jad Chaaban 16/03/2007.
Turkish EU Accession. Short-term Threats vs. Long-term Opportunities Presented by: Emil Iliev Kiril Kostov Lyubomir Vankov.
Slides prepared by Thomas Bishop Chapter 2 World Trade: An Overview.
This paper is the logical continuation of my earlier article: Shock Therapy versus Gradualism: The End of the Debate (Explaining the Magnitude of the Transformational.
Is the expenditure on the ‘HS2’ rail route to Birmingham justified? To see more of our products visit our website at Mark Evetts, Cheltenham.
The Geography of the Middle East
Instituto de Economia IE II Seminario Internacional America Latina y el Caribe Y China: condiciones y retos em el siglo XXI CHINESE COMPETITION'S IMPACT.
Economic Impact of Improvements in Trade Facilitation Farrukh Iqbal Egypt, April 17, 2004.
TP/ Side 1 European spatial and transport scenarios for the Baltic Region  Scenarios developed in the European Spatial Development Observatory Network.
Overview of Project Main objective of study is to assess the impact of delay at border crossings and resulting changes in user benefits and broad macroeconomic.
Transit Country- Case Georgia
© Economics Department, King’s School, Chester Enlargement of the EU: investigating the issues.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE IN TURKEY: Developments in the Framework of EU Accession Erol H. ÇAKMAK Department of Economics Middle East Technical University (METU),
TRACECA PROJECT EVALUATION
Challenges and Opportunities of Georgia’s Economy Mr. Aleksi Aleksishvili ₋ Chairman of Policy and Management Consulting Group (PMCG) ₋
Economic Integration and Growth Jan Fidrmuc Brunel University.
Economic Development Perspectives of the area of the Elbe/Oder Chamber Union (KEO) Dr. Silvia Stiller Brussels 25th June 2013.
Chapter 2 World Trade: An Overview Yanan University Finance and Economics Dep. Aihong Qin.
GLOBALIZAITON: IS IT MORE THAN TRADE? Joseph J. St. Marie The University of Southern Mississippi.
NS4301 Political Economy of Africa Summer Term 2015 Special Economic Zones (SEZs)
Track Access Charges for the Bulgarian Railways – Technical Assistance Market demand.
Importance of Javakhq. Why Should We Care? 1. Final Siege.
1 European Union – Korea Free Trade Agreement Sustainability Impact Assessment: Phase One Public Presentation November 30,
The European Union & Business A2 Business Studies Unit 4.
Physical Geography of SW Asia
Directorate-general for Energy and Transport European Commission June rd Expert Group Meeting Transport Euro-Asian Linkages Sanna Kuukka.
Geneva, May The demand and supply of international transport services: The relationships between trade, transport costs and.
TRACECA CONSTRUCTION OF INTERMODAL TERMINAL IN THE REGION OF RUSE CITY BULGARIA Infrastructure Working Group Kiev, 11 May 2011.
Diaspora, external trade and FDI in South Caucasus countries Pavel Chistyakov, Russia (Centre for Strategic Research; Geographic department of Moscow State.
Project # 1 Rikoti-Zestaponi Highway May, Rikoti-Zestaponi Highway 11/29/2015Ministry of Regional Development & Infrastructure of Georgia 2 Poti.
International Logistics Centres for Western NIS and the Caucasus Georgia: Areas in the vicinity of Tbilisi airport Ministry of Economy and Sustainable.
Towards an integrated transport system in the Baltic Sea Region
International Trade & its Benefits. Why do Nations Trade? To obtain goods they cannot produce To reflect comparative advantage- when one country produces.
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) Opportunities and Impacts for Taiwanese and Malaysian Companies Study undertaken by the Asian Strategy and Leadership.
Aid, policies and Growth
1 TRADE PROMOTION POLICIES IN THE BLACK SEA REGION Presentation by Oleh Havrylyshyn Black Sea Conference on Regional Integration And Growth Feb ,2009.
1 Jacek Cukrowski Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Advisor, UNDP, Europe and the CIS Bratislava Regional Centre Aid for Trade (AfT) Needs Assessment.
Main Macroeconomic Data of Georgia GDP In 2014 GDP growth rate was 4.6% (Nominal GDP USD 16.5 bln.). GDP Structure: 17.5% - Trade, 16.9% - Industry, 10.4%
Company LOGO OIL TRANSPORTATION: TRENDS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ESTONIA Anna Murulauk Estonian Institute for Futures Studies March 6 th 2008.
Development mechanisms and strategies of port regions César Ducruet Researcher, CNRS UMR 8504 Géographie-Cités Workshop on Ports as Engines of Economic.
Impact Evaluation at MCC Introduction – Brief overview of M&E at MCC.
A PPLICATION OF A SPATIAL EQUILIBRIUM MODEL FOR ETHANOL MULTIMODALITY IN B RAZIL Jamile de Campos Coleti Ph. D. candidate Institute of Economics University.
Intruduction 1.Energy projects in South Caucasus 2.Energy projects in the implementing stage 3.South Caucasus countries as an energy alternative for EU.
BREXIT & International Air Travel
The Geography of the Middle East
Downtown Valdosta Truck Traffic Mitigation Study
Economics Brown Bag Series Jad Chaaban 16/03/2007
The intermodal logistics capacity in the region of Záhony
CEDEFOP Session 2: Closer look at the roadmap Potential impacts of Brexit and other macroeconomic issues Production of Skills Supply and Demand Forecasts.
The Geography of the Middle East
Maritime connectivity: Multimodal transport is key
The Geography of the Middle East
ECO 303 INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS I LECTURE NOTES
Managing Transaction Exposure
NEW CONNECTION ROAD BETWEEN MOLDOVA AND ROMANIA
EVA MOLNAR, TRANSPORT SECTOR MANAGER
Briefing by George Niculescu, Head of Research, EGF, Brussels,
KEYNOTE STAGE SPONSOR.
Economics Brown Bag Series Jad Chaaban 16/03/2007
International Monetary Fund April 2019 Sub-Saharan Africa
East European countries outside Russia
Presentation transcript:

A Phased Strategy for Opening Armenia’s Western Border Armenian International Policy Research Group Torosyan, Gagnidze, Beilock

Introduction This study: outlines a plan to open Armenia’s borders with Turkey examines likely changes in trade flows between Armenia and Turkey discusses how open border will affect other countries in and around the region, including: Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, and Russia

Literature review Polyakov “Changing Trade Patterns after Conflict Resolution in South Caucasus”, 2001 uses a gravity model to estimate trade flows between Armenia and Turkey estimates are overly optimistic: the overall effect on Armenian economy from border opening is calculated to be as much as 38% of the the size of GDP.

Literature review AEPLAC’s “Study of the Economic Impact on the Armenian Economy from Re-Opening of the Turkish-Armenian Borders”, 2005 estimates a gravity model of trade to calculate short and medium term effects of border opening. Uses CGE modeling to estimate longer term effects of border opening. too conservative in estimates of potential economic effects of border opening.

Current access to Turkey Currently almost all overland trade between Armenia and Turkey takes place via Georgia. There are two major border passages that are being used for Armenian trade with Turkey: passage G1 - south of Batumi passage G2 - south-west of Akhaltsikhe An additional passage that is sometimes used is G3 south-west of Akhalkalaki. No railroad between Georgia and Turkey.

Current access to Turkey

Strategies for Opening the Border There are at least six potential border crossings by road and one rail connection between Armenia and Turkey. Stage I: Opening two passages to handle initial traffic and test systems. A1 – Metsamor A2 – Gyumri

Strategies for Opening the Border Stage II: As traffic volumes increase, both countries could set up additional border crossings. Options: A3 - Margara village A4 - Bagaran village A5 - Haykadzor village A6 - Paghakn village

Looking at the Region What are some of the potential benefits of open borders to the following countries of the region? Azerbaijan Georgia Iran, Gulf States Armenia Turkey

Azerbaijan The scenario around which the project has been developed is the opening of borders between Turkey and Armenia, but not between Azerbaijan and Armenia. However, Turkey closed the border in support of Azerbaijan. Ending it without Azerbaijan’s acquiescence would be politically difficult, at best, and more likely impossible. To have Azerbaijan’s consent, concessions favoring Azerbaijan could be negotiated.

Armenia’s Potential as a Transshipment Corridor north-south routs through Armenia are both longer and more difficult than other routes in an east-west direction, Armenia has considerable potential for transshipments: between Baku and Kars or Istanbul, routes through Armenia are as short as or shorter than alternative routings and have to negotiate fewer natural barriers (i.e. mountain ranges). moreover, the only rail connection between the Caucasus and Turkey is through Armenia.

The Georgian Buffer Our study assumes that full cessation of the closed border between Armenia and Azerbaijan (“mainland”) is impossible. Fortunately, the main east-west rail line and roadway connect Armenia and Azerbaijan via Georgia => carriers and freight can transit between Armenia and Azerbaijan without crossing a common border.

Transshipments via Armenia With an open border between Armenia and Turkey, Turkish carriers would be free to transit Armenia, improving linkages between Azerbaijan and Turkey. Armenia’s rail system also could carry transshipments of freight bound to or from Azerbaijan. There would have to be non-discriminatory treatment of cargoes at or near cost level fees

Access to Nakhichevan Armenia could consider effecting a partial opening of the border with Nakhichevan. This might be conceived of as Stage III of a phased opening, giving better access to South Armenia Nakhichevan Iran

Georgia Because of the closed border, Georgia has had a virtual monopoly over surface freight movements to and from Armenia. For many years Georgia levied surcharges on all freight to and from Armenia. Recently Georgian government has taken steps to lower transit fees for Armenian trade, and also to limit unofficial payments on the road. Virtually all freight moving between the West and Azerbaijan uses Georgian roads or rails and its ports.

Open borders between Armenia and Turkey may reduce the volumes and/or premiums for Georgia from Armenian transit traffic, but is unlikely to threaten transit trade to/from Azerbaijan going through Georgia. If transit traffic through Nakhichevan were permitted, Georgian importers and exporters would benefit from improved access to Iran and the Gulf States. Georgian importers and exporters would also benefit from improved road and rail access to some parts of Turkey. What’s in for Georgia?

There is a possibility of negative effects of export diversion for Georgia when Armenian- Turkish border opens. The magnitude of this effect would depend on how much overlap there might be between Georgian and Armenian exports to Turkey. To determine the extent of that overlap we use export similarity technique, also known as Finger-Kreinin Index (FKI). The index ranges from 0 (no overlap) to 1 (complete overlap). Increased Competition in Turkey?

Armenian and Georgian export flows to the EU in 2004 did not have a big overlap: FKI is calculated to be => Armenian and Georgian goods are not very close substitutes in European markets. Products that do overlap either have a small share in overall exports in both countries, or are homogeneous in nature => Development of Armenia-Turkey trade will not have a very strong diversion effect on Georgian exports to Turkey. More Compliments than Substitutes

Opening the border with Turkey will allow shortening of travel distances to Iran (to Tabriz, by road) Syria (to Aleppo, by road and rail) Lebanon (to Beirut, by road and rail) further to the south. Railroad from Gyumri will allow convenient access to Greece (Thessaloniki) and other European counties. Iran, and the Gulf States

Trade benefits from open border would be magnified if road and rail transits through Abkhazia were also restored. Russia?

Estimating Changes in Regional Trade Pattern To assess potential trade flows between Armenia and Turkey a gravity model is developed and estimated. Model features: Countries: transition countries, developed European countries, Turkey, and Israel Estimation: data for 1999 are used to estimate the model, data for 2004 are used to predict potential trade flows between Armenia and Turkey.

Results : TE Imports from Europe and Turkey

Results : TE Exports to Europe and Turkey

Estimating Changes in Regional Trade Pattern Our model explains 75-80% of total variation in trade for sample countries. Most of the coefficient estimates are highly significant and are in line with expectations. To check the robustness of our results we estimate Armenia-Turkey trade volumes for 2004 and compare them with actual data: Estimated Actual Imports from Turkey $33,887,690 $37,498,051 Exports to Turkey $3,918,173 $1,200,233

Results: Open Border Effect After obtaining gravity model estimates we calculate the increase in trade that will result from border opening estimated volume of Armenian imports from Turkey is $51,041,170, some 50% higher than with closed border estimated volume of Armenian exports to Turkey is $5,404,574 which corresponds to 38% increase in exports

Results: Reduced Distance Effect If we adjust distance as well to reflect shorter travel time increase in trade volume is likely to be even higher: each 10% of reduction in distance will lead to 15.6% increase in imports from Turkey each 10% of reduction in distance will lead to 12.6% increase in exports to Turkey

Results: GDP Growth Our estimates are for 2004 levels of GDP and GDP per capita. However, due to 1. High rates of GDP growth in Armenia 2. Turkey’s emphasis on increasing GDP we are likely to observe a further expansion in Armenia-Turkey trade relations. GDP growth rates in 2005 were 5.6% in Turkey and 13.9% in Armenia. This would increase our exports estimates to Turkey by 23.8% ($1.3 mln.), while imports from Turkey would be 20.8% higher ($14 mln.)

Results In addition, we should take into consideration the fact that with open border there will be railroad connection between Armenia and Turkey, which is not reflected in our model. Hence, there is another important factor that will influence trade volumes between our two countries.