Towards a Eurasian Economic Union: the challenge of integration and unity. CEPS Special Report No. 75/December 2012

In the lead-up to the creation of a Eurasian Economic Union in 2015, the Customs Union and the Common Economic Space between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan represent two elements of the most ambitious regional integration project launched in the post-Soviet era since 1991. This CEPS Special Report examines both the potential and the limits of Eurasian economic integration. For the purpose of assessing the Eurasian integration process, CEPS applied a modified version of a framework first developed by Ernest B. Haas and Philippe C. Schmitter in 1964 to project whether economic integration of a group of countries automatically engenders political unity. Taking the data available for the early stages of the European integration process as a benchmark, the results for the Customs Union and the Common Economic Space point to a rather unfavourable outlook for Eurasian economic integration.

Testing the limits of quasi-geostrophic theory: application to observed laboratory flows outside the quasi-geostrophic regime

We compare laboratory observations of equilibrated baroclinic waves in the rotating two-layer annulus, with numerical simulations from a quasi-geostrophic model. The laboratory experiments lie well outside the quasi-geostrophic regime: the Rossby number reaches unity; the depth-to-width aspect ratio is large; and the fluid contains ageostrophic inertia–gravity waves. Despite being formally inapplicable, the quasi-geostrophic model captures the laboratory flows reasonably well. The model displays several systematic biases, which are consequences of its treatment of boundary layers and neglect of interfacial surface tension and which may be explained without invoking the dynamical effects of the moderate Rossby number, large aspect ratio or inertia–gravity waves. We conclude that quasi-geostrophic theory appears to continue to apply well outside its formal bounds.

Unity as a unit

The arguments for regarding the number 1 as a unit of the SI are reviewed. Examples of dimensionless quantities are presented, and problems associated with representing the values of dimensionless quantities of very small magnitude are discussed. The logarithmic ratio units bel, decibel and neper are discussed.