Forsker
Roman Vakulchuk
Kontaktinfo og filer
Sammendrag
Roman Vakulchuk er seniorforsker ved NUPI. Han har en doktorgrad i økonomi fra Jacobs University Bremen i Tyskland. Vakulchuk har særlig kunnskap om Kazakhstan, øvrige land i Sentral-Asia og Ukraina, og forskningsfelt inkluderer økonomisk endring og integrasjon, klimaendringer, handel, infrastruktur og transport, næringlivskultur og statskapitalisme i fremvoksende markeder.
Vakulchuk har arbeidserfaring som prosjektleder og ekspert i forskningsprosjekter organisert av blant andre Verdensbanken, Asian Development Bank, Utenriksdepartementet og Norges forskningsråd. Vakulchuk har også arbeidet for Shell i Tyskland. Han snakker engelsk, russisk, ukrainsk, fransk og tysk.
Ekspertise
Aktivitet
Filter
Tøm alle filtre
Myanmar – utfordringar og moglegheiter
FN Resident Coordinator og UNDP representant i Myanmar, Knut Østby, og forskarane Roman Vakulchuk og Kristian Stokke ser nærare på Myanmar - eit land med store politiske og økonomiske utfordringar.
Russia’s New Asian Tilt: How Much Does Economy Matter?
The economic development of Russia’s Far East has been proclaimed a policy priority, to be facilitated by an ambitious turn or ‘pivot’ to Asia. This chapter assesses Russia’s economic reorientation towards Asia, offering an overview of the Far Eastern dimension of Russia’s economic relations with its major Asian partners in 2010–16, based on analysis of the dynamics of investment, trade relations and business climate development. Since 2014, trade with Asian partners has stagnated, while foreign investment (except for Chinese) has remained negligible. Moreover, trade is still mainly oriented towards markets in European Russia. The chapter concludes that Russia’s pivot to Asia has not yet become an economic pivot—and that such a turn would be more easily attainable under a non-sanctions regime.
Myanmar: A Political Economy Analysis
Myanmar may for a long time remain in a transitional state with an uncertain future. After a series of political and economic liberalization reforms from 2011 onwards, Myanmar’s political trajectory remains open-ended, although the most plausible scenario remains a continued slow democratization process. The democratic opening has been driven largely by the interest of the military rulers in changing Myanmar’s relations with Western states and thereby gaining leverage vis-à-vis China. Continued military influence, persistent capacity problems in political parties and parliamentary politics, weak channels of political representation and limited administrative capacity give rise to critical questions about the substance of democratization and economic development in Myanmar. The country’s informal economy is one of the largest in the world and is upheld by informal elite pacts that were formed in the military era, often involving high-ranking officers and crony companies. Along with a high level of corruption and lack of redistributive mechanisms the continuing cronyism hinders inclusive growth. If these economic structures persist, social and ethnic conflicts may intensify and progress towards further democratization stall. Despite this, foreign direct investments in resource extraction and other sectors have been on the rise since 2011 and are likely to continue. Myanmar is also ranked as the world’s second-most vulnerable country to climate change. The government needs a better understanding of climate change and its effects – both its direct impacts on Myanmar and its indirect impacts via neighbouring countries such as Bangladesh. As Myanmar remains at a crossroads, smart external assistance may have greater long-term impact in Myanmar than in other recipient countries where the situation is less volatile. However, donors may also become increasingly frustrated and reduce their assistance because of the ongoing Rohingya crisis and because of the limited local capacity to absorb international assistance.
Kazakhstan: Civil Society and Natural Resource Policy in Kazakhstan
In Kazakhstan, civil society is held back and has had a limited role in the management of the petroleum sector. As this chapter notes, civil society has had little experience of promoting its own interests vis-à-vis the state, and public discussion of natural resource issues has been mainly government-driven. The fact that Kazakhstan made a notable step forward—from being a collapsing socialist economy in the 1990s to becoming a regional economic player with improved social and economic performance—has helped to legitimize non-transparent natural resource policies. As long as the socio-economic situation continues to improve or remains stable, the non-transparent management of natural resources is likely to be accepted by the population, which, like the Russian population, puts a premium on stability. The relative passivity of civil society has been compensated by Kazakhstan’s exposure to international initiatives and organizations such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and numerous UN agencies. As in Azerbaijan, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) has provided a platform for some civil society engagement with industry and government.
Impact of Climate Change on ASEAN International Affairs: Risk and Opportunity Multiplier
This study examines the implications of climate change for international affairs in Southeast Asia and for ASEAN as a multilateral organization. Climate change and efforts to mitigate climate change give rise to major risks as well as opportunities in international affairs. It is therefore in the interest of all countries to be aware of the risks and prepare for them, and the overarching purpose of this study is to support ASEAN and its member states in this area. Given Southeast Asia’s complex geography—with numerous archipelagoes, long coastlines, intricate borders, and great-power neighbors—climate change is especially likely to affect interstate relations in the region.Climate change may impact on international affairs among the ASEAN countries at several levels. Firstly, changing climatic conditions may affect interstate relations through humanitarian crises, migration, and/or the need for greater imports of vital goods. Secondly, reducing greenhouse gas emissions requires international coordination and cooperation. Thirdly, the global energy transition driven by climate policy may lead to an altered geopolitical situation in the world, including ASEAN.
Political economy analyses
I dette prosjektet analyserer vi politisk økonomi for elleve land som er sentrale i Norges utviklingssamarbeid...
EUs strategi for Sentral-Asia: Partnarskap for berekraftig utvikling
Korleis kan EU bidra til at landa i Sentral-Asia held fram med å utvikle seg i rett retning?
Den ukrainske energimarknaden er i endring: korleis lykkast i ein ny geopolitisk setting?
NUPI og NUCC inviterer leiande ekspertar til å dele sitt syn på den siste utviklinga på den ukrainske energimarknaden.
Russia’s Reorientation to the East: How Much Does Economy Matter?
This policy brief assesses Russian involvement in the growing Asia-Pacific economies, and offers an overview of the Far Eastern dimension of Russia’s economic relations with its major Asian partners, 2010–2016. It discusses the dynamics of investment and trade relations, and reflects on Russia’s changing economic priorities before and after the conflict with Ukraine and introduction of international sanctions, with a focus on implications for Russia–Asia relations in the Russian Far East.
The Geopolitics of Renewable Energy
For a century, the geopolitics of energy has been synonymous with the geopolitics of oil and gas. However, geopolitics and the global energy economy are both changing. The international order predominant since the end of World War II faces mounting challenges. At the same time, renewable energy is growing rapidly. Nevertheless, the geopolitics of renewable energy has received relatively little attention, especially when considering the far-reaching consequences of a global shift to renewable energy. The paper starts with a discussion of seven renewable energy scenarios for the coming decades: the IEA’s World Energy Outlook 2016, the EIA’s International Energy Outlook 2016, IRENA’s REmap 2016, Bloomberg’s New Energy Outlook 2016, BP’s Energy Outlook 2016, Exxon-Mobil’s Outlook for Energy 2016 and the joint IEA and IRENA G20 de-carbonization scenario. The paper then discusses seven mechanisms through which renewables could shape geopolitics: Critical materials supply chains, technology and finance, new resource curse, electric grids, reduced oil and gas demand, avoided climate change, and sustainable energy access.