Gazprom's position on the Russian gas market weakening. OSW Commentary No. 70, 2012-02-23

As the difficulties Gazprom has faced in recent years on the European market have multiplied1, so more and more symptoms have appeared which may suggest that the company���s dominant position is deteriorating. The decision made by the Russian government in June 2011 to double the tax Gazprom has to pay on the extraction of gas, which was later approved by parliament, was the first time in many years when the company���s fiscal privileges were withdrawn. The process of Gazprom���s assets being taken over by private companies and business partners from within Vladimir Putin���s closest circle is underway. More and more frequently attempts are being made to challenge the company���s monopoly in areas of key importance for the functioning of the entire gas sector, such as Gazprom���s exclusive right to dispose of the Russian gas transportation system and its exports monopoly. Competition from independent gas producers on the domestic market is growing, and Gazprom is gradually being pushed out of some of that market���s most profitable segments (industrial clients). The emerging tendencies in the Russian gas sector derive from a number of factors ��� from the situation on the European gas market, through difficulties hampering the development of the sector in Russia itself, to the private interests of the current ruling class and its business partners. The plans for a structural reform of the monopoly (including isolating gas transportation system from Gazprom), presented since 2000 by the Ministry for Economic Development and since 2003 by the Russian Association of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP), suggest a direction for the changes necessary to stimulate the sector���s development and improve the efficiency of Gazprom itself. However, the monopolist���s current business model gives the government full control over this strategic enterprise, which is a core of Putin���s concept for developing Russia as a global energy power. Despite Putin���s recent statement that he ���does not rule out privatising Gazprom in the future��� (made at a meeting with political scientists in Moscow on 6 February this year), any structural reform of Gazprom (and consequently, a weakening of the state���s control over it) seems unlikely in the foreseeable future. Still, the developments on the domestic market ��� growing pressure from other gas companies (oil corporations and independent producers) and changes on the European market2 ��� may result in the weakening of Gazprom���s monopoly privileges and a gradual deterioration of its special status within Russia.

Russia's best ally: The situation of the Russian oil sector and forecast for its future. OSW Study 39/2012

Oil is a strategic raw material for Russia and one of fundamental significance for the functioning of the state and its future. Taxes on oil production and exports are the most important source of state budget revenues which guarantee Russia maintains its political and economic stability. Russia is building its international position on the basis of its vast raw material and energy potential. While a great number of various publications have been devoted to Russian gas and Gazprom, surprisingly little research has been done into the present condition and possible future developments of the Russian oil sector, despite the fact that oil has and will have a much greater impact than gas on the functioning and the future of Russia. The main objective of this text is to describe the present situation of the Russian oil sector, its problems and the challenges it is posing, as well as the government���s policy towards this key branch of the Russian economy. This will be an introduction to an attempt to answer to the questions about the possible future production and the export levels of Russian oil, also broken down into the European and Asian directions.

Social Capital and Individual Happiness in Europe. Bruges European Economic Research (BEER) Papers 25/December 2012

This paper explores the relationship between social capital and happiness both in Europe as a whole, as well as in its four main geographical macro-regions ��� North, South, East and West ��� separately. We test the hypothesis of whether social capital, in its three-fold definition established by Coleman (1988) ��� trust, social interaction, and norms and sanctions ��� influences individual happiness across European countries and regions. The concept of social capital is further enriched by incorporating Putnam- (1993) and Olson- (1982) type variables on associational activity. Using ordinal logistic regression analysis on data for 48,583 individuals from 25 European countries, we reach three main findings. First, social capital matters for happiness across the three dimensions considered. Second, the main drivers of the effects of social capital on happiness appear to be informal social interaction and general social, as well as institutional trust. And third, there are significant differences in how social capital interacts with happiness across different areas of Europe, with the connection being at is weakest in the Nordic countries.

Is Vietnam the Right Choice for Foreign Investment?: The Case of the European Union���s Slipping Opportunity. ACES Working Papers, 2012

This analysis is broken into three interdependent sections: First, an analysis of the restrictions placed on foreign direct investment in Vietnam captures the current freedoms and inhibitors of investment in Vietnam. Foreign direct investment is defined by the UN as an investment made to acquire a lasting interest in or effective control over an enterprise operating outside of the economy of the investor. Second, a cursory look at the macroeconomic risks, to which investment dollars are susceptible, will paint a realistic portrait of return of foreign investment. Finally, this paper will examine the current, and historical, trade relationship between Vietnam and the European Union, in order to convey that the opportunity for investment in Vietnam remains to be an opportunity for Europe���s developed economies.

Crimea one year after Russian annexation. EPC Policy Brief, 24 March 2015

On 18 March 2014, the Lower House of the Russian Parliament approved a Treaty to annex the Ukrainian Black Sea Peninsula of Crimea by 443 to 1 votes. This act violated Ukraine's sovereignty, representing a fundamental breach of international law; the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and the terms of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, whereby the nuclear arsenal stationed on Ukraine's territory after the collapse of the Soviet Union was relinquished in exchange for security assurances of its sovereign territorial integrity. Russia, the US, France and the UK all signed. The annexation also violated a number of bilateral agreements between Ukraine and Russia. Russia's actions were immediately condemned by the international community. A 13 March European Parliament Resolution "firmly condemns Russia's act of aggression in invading Crimea, which is an inseparable part of Ukraine and recognised as such by the Russian Federation".

Social Citizenship and Institution Building: EU-Enlargement and the Restructuring of Welfare States in East Central Europe. CES Germany & Europe Working Paper, No. 01.2, April 2001

With the EU-enlargement process well underway, this paper focuses on social citizenship as a conceptual frame for analyzing the restructuring of social institutions in applicant countries in East Central Europe. So far, comparative welfare state analysis has concentrated mainly on the developed economies of the OECD-countries; there is little systematic analytical work on the transitions in post-communist Europe. Theoretically, this paper builds on comparative welfare state analysis as well as on new institutionalism. The initial hypothesis is built on the assumption that emerging patterns of social support and social security diverge from the typology described in the comparative welfare state literature inasmuch as the transformation of postcommunist societies is distinctly different from the building of welfare states in Europe. The paper argues that institutionbuilding is shaped by and embedded in the process of European integration and part of governance in the EU. Anticipating full membership in the European Union, the applicant countries have to adapt to the rules and regulations of the EU, including the "social acquis." Therefore, framing becomes an important feature of institutional changes. The paper seeks to identify distinct patterns and problems of the institutionalization of social citizenship.

Balancing realism and vision - The prospects of EU-Israel relations in times of change and uncertainty. European Policy Brief, 28 May 2015

In this joint EPC-FSD Policy Brief, Andrea Frontini and Eran Etzion assess the state of play and the future prospects of EU-Israel relations in the light of recent domestic and regional political developments. They argue that, despite frequent cacophony and recurring stalemates, the EU-Israel partnership still has the potential to pursue shared strategic objectives. The two sides have to realign their relations, taking into account new realities and common challenges in the Middle East and Northern Africa region, and the current state of the Middle East Peace Process. More careful differentiation and stronger prioritisation of the policy dossiers at stake are urgently needed. An autonomous but joined up review of the overall relationship, guided by courage, pragmatism and stronger strategic direction, is crucial in order to move ahead.