Conceptual approach to identifying the centro-periphery of maritime transboundary regions

The increase in the role of the “maritime” component of the Russian economy and the cross-border regionalization associated with the development of coastal regions are factors in the transformation of central-peripheral relations in Russia and at its borders, which makes the analysis of factors and trends of relevant processes relevant. The purpose of the article in this regard is to conceptualize the center-periphery in the “maritime” transboundary regions, to identify the features of their center-peripheral structuring, and to form approaches to organizing a monitoring system for relevant processes. The subject of research in this regard was the prerequisites and format of transboundary regionalization, their refraction in the conditions of marine transaqual regionogenesis, and approaches to the identification and formation of a monitoring system.

The article substantiates the differentiation of transboundary interaction and transboundary regionogenesis, proposes a system of indicators of a “mature” transboundary region, and takes an analysis of the relationship between the central-peripheral status and positions in transboundary interaction. A system of projections of cross-border interaction and cross-border regionalization on cross-border forms of cooperation and a spatial center-peripheral structure is proposed. Features of centro-peripheral structuring of transaqual transboundary regionogenesis were revealed, taking into account the specifics imposed by marine basins.

Sections and indicators of the system for monitoring central-peripheral dynamics in “offshore” transboundary regions are proposed. The development of a system for monitoring and modeling the formation of central-peripheral structures of “marine” (aqua) regions is designed to be “integrated” into the system of federal and regional management in order to long-term increase the efficiency of using the marine potential and resources of transaqual regionasilation.

Keywords

centro-periphery, cross-border regions, monitoring system, transaqual interaction, regionogenesis

Acknowledgment

The study was supported by the Russian Science Foundation grant No. 22-28-00022, https://xn--m1afn.xn--p1ai/project/22-28-00022/ at the Southern Federal University.

Received

01.09.2022

Publication date

22.11.2022

Number of characters

33709

Cite Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in

GOST	Gontar N. Conceptual approach to identifying the centro-periphery of “maritime” transboundary regions // Pskov Journal of Regional Studies – 2022. – Volume 18. No4/2022 C. 71-89 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://prj.pskgu.ru/S221979310021835-1-1 (circulation date: 02.05.2024). DOI: 10.37490/S221979310021835-1
MLA	Gontar, Nikolay "Conceptual approach to identifying the centro-periphery of “maritime” transboundary regions." Pskov Journal of Regional Studies 4 (2022):71-89. DOI: 10.37490/S221979310021835-1
APA	Gontar N. (2022). Conceptual approach to identifying the centro-periphery of “maritime” transboundary regions. Pskov Journal of Regional Studies (4), pp.71-89 DOI: 10.37490/S221979310021835-1

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.


1	Введение. Разнообразие форм соразвития стран и регионов на глобальном уровне включает формирование сравнительно более тесных связей стран и регионов, схожих по уровню развития либо близких пространственно. Такое взаимодействие принимает форму транснациональной регионализации, которая дополняет и трансформирует центро-периферийную структуру. Одновременно, трансграничные регионы характеризуются собственной центро-периферийной структуризацией [6], которая принимает особую форму в трансаквальных трансграничных регионах (анализу которых в последнее время были посвящены исследования коллективов П. Я. Бакланова, А. Г. Дружинина, Г. М. Фёдорова [1; 7; 20]), формирующихся с опорой на «морскую» составляющую их положения, хозяйственной структуры и связей. Усложнение центро-периферийных процессов ставит задачу идентификации центро-периферийной структуризации в условиях «морских» трансграничных регионов, и формирования подходов к созданию соответствующей системы мониторинга.
2	Цель исследования — выявление особенностей центро-периферийной структуризации «морских» трансграничных регионов и выработка предложений по её мониторингу на основе анализа устойчивых закономерностей центро-периферийной динамики и с учётом их преломления в условиях морского трансграничного регионогенеза.
3	Изученность проблемы. Проблематика трансграничной регионализации в зарубежных исследованиях формировалась в условиях ослабления торговых барьеров во второй половине ХХ в., нивелирования барьерной функции границ, проявления интеграционных трансграничных процессов на мезо- и микроуровне, что сопровождалось сдвигом исследований процесса от индустриальной теории роста к теории эндогенного роста в 1970-х и 1980-х гг. [36]. Сегодня исследования сосредотачиваются как на отдельных кейсах трансграничного сотрудничества, так и на обобщении опыта трансграничного строительства в ЕС. Анализ широкого спектра инициатив в этой сфере позволил при этом, например, C. M. Johnson [30] отметить запутанную картину текущих региональных инициатив ЕС как следствие появления и исчезновения приграничных регионов в ответ на изменение политических приоритетов и макроинституциональных источников финансирования. Также отметим анализ с акцентом на структуру, значение и эволюцию трансграничного сотрудничества в ЕС у J. Kaucic, C. Sohn [31], J. B. Harguindeguy, A. S. Sanchez [29]. Процессы трансграничной интеграции активно исследуются и применительно к другим макрорегионам (Америке, странам Азии и Африки), с акцентом как на общие закономерности, так и на менее теоретически осмысленные (несмотря на обилие эмпирики) форматы такового (пример такого рода — анализ трансграничных региональных инновационных систем [34]).
4	На постсоветском пространстве исследования трансграничности направлены на поиск моделей взаимодействия на новых постсоветских границах России и «старых» границах, обретших новое качество. Исследования приграничных и трансграничных процессов акцентировали внимание на концептуализации трансграничности и транснациональности [13], поиске драйверов роста приграничных (частью — периферийных [12]) регионов. Значительное внимание (особенно с активизацией торгово-экономических отношений с ЕС с нач. 2000-х гг.) уделено анализу факторов и форм выстраивания трансграничного взаимодействия в формате еврорегинов [4; 20] — на западных границах РФ, на границах с постсоветскими странами [12; 17], в формате особых экономических зон — на Дальнем Востоке [1], на границе РФ и Казахстана [9]. Соответствующие исследования затрагивали спектр и динамику функций государственных границ [9], анализ становления и морфологии транснациональных и трансграничных регионов [3; 20], практик трансграничного взаимодействия [16; 19].

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Baklanov P. Ya., Novikov A. N., Novikova M. S. (2018), The influence of transboundary on the territorial structures of the Primorsky Territory of Russia and adjacent territories, Uchenyye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Seriya: Yestestvennyye nauki, vol. 160, no. 1, рр. 162–177. (In Russ.).

2. Bezrukov L. A. (2008), Continental-oceanic dichotomy in international and regional development, Novosibirsk, Geo, 256 p. (In Russ.).

3. Volynchuk A. B. (2009), Cross-border region: theoretical foundations of geopolitical research, Gumanitarnyye issledovaniya v Vostochnoy Sibiri i na Dal'nem Vostoke, no. 4 (8), pp. 49–55. (In Russ.).

4. Galazova S. S., Panfilova E. A., Biganova M. A. (2014), Comparative analysis of European and Russian transboundary regionalism, Fundamental'nyye issledovaniya, no. 11–9, рр. 2003–2009. (In Russ.).

5. Gontar N. V. (2020), Marine economic complex of Russia: organizational and institutional problems of implementing development measures (on the example of state programs), Ekonomiko-upravlencheskiy kongress. Sbornik statey po materialam Mezhdunarodnogo nauchno-prakticheskogo meropriyatiya, Belgorod, pp. 104–109 (In Russ.).

6. Gritsai O. V., Ioffe G. V., Treivish A. I. (1991), Center and periphery in regional development, Moscow, IG RAN, 168 p. (In Russ.).

7. Druzhinin A. G., Gorochnaya V. V., Gontar N. V., Dets I. A., Lachininsky S. S., Mikhailov A. S. (2017), Cross-border clusters in the coastal zones of the European part of Russia: inventory, typology, identification of factors and development prospects, Baltic region, vol. 9. no. 4. pp. 29–44. (In Russ.).

8. Ivanova I. S. (2013), The Strait of Malacca: Formation of an International Economic Region, Yugo-Vostochnaya Aziya: aktual'nyye problemy razvitiya, no. 20, рр. 76–91. (In Russ.).

9. Karpenko M. S., Kolosov V. A., Sebentsov A. B. (2021). Transformation of the Russian-Kazakh borderland in the post-Soviet period: institutional and economic dimensions, Problemy natsional'noy strategii, no. 5 (68), pp. 25–40. (In Russ.).

10. Katrovsky A. P., Ridevsky G. V. (2013), Spatial economic asymmetry as a factor in the development of the Russian-Belarusian transboundary region, Regional'nyye issledovaniya, no. 3 (41), pp. 128–136. (In Russ.).

11. Kireev A. A. (2009), Specificity of the Far Eastern border of Russia: theory and history, Oykumena. Regionovedcheskiye issledovaniya, no. 2 (9), pp. 70–82. (In Russ.).

12. Kolosov V. A. (2020), The crisis in relations between Russia and Ukraine and its impact on cross-border interactions, Aktual'nyye problemy mirovoy politiki. Yezhegodnyy al'manakh, St. Petersburg, pp. 444–464. (In Russ.).

13. Korneevets V. S. (2010), International transnational and transboundary regions: signs, features, hierarchy, Vestnik Rossiyskogo gosudar-stvennogo universiteta im. I. Kanta, no. 1, рр. 27–34. (In Russ.).

14. Kostyunina G. M., Baronov V. I. (2011), Cross-border free economic zones in foreign countries (on the example of China), Vestnik MGIMO Universiteta, no. 2 (17), pp. 169–178. (In Russ.).

15. Kuznetsov A. V. (2012), Cross-border corporate integration in the Baltic region, Baltic region, no. 1 (11), pp. 17–26. (In Russ.).

16. Mezhevich N. M. (2011), Cross-border cooperation: theory and Russian regional practice, Yuzhno-Rossiyskiy forum: ekonomika, sotsiologiya, politologiya, sotsial'no-ekonomicheskaya geografiya, no. 1 (2), pp. 24–33. (In Russ.).

17. Osmolovskaya L. G. (2016), Typology of Russian border regions according to the degree of development of cross-border relations, Regional'nyye issledovaniya, no. 1 (51), pp. 126–135. (In Russ.).

18. Pilyasov A. N. (2011), New economic geography (NEG) and its potential for studying the location of Russia's productive forces, Regional'nyye issledovaniya, no. 1 (31), pp. 3–31. (In Russ.).

19. Ponkratova L. A. (2010), Cross-border exchanges and interaction between the border regions of Russia and China, Problemy Dal'nego Vostoka, no. 6, рр. 99–115. (In Russ.).

20. Fedorov G. M. (2016), Problems of cross-border regional formation in the Russian regions in the Baltic, Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskaya geografiya. Vestnik Assotsiatsii rossiyskikh geografov-obshchestvovedov, no. 5. pp. 82–92. (In Russ.).

21. Aksamovic D., Simunovic L., Kuna I. (2019), Cross border movement of companies: the new EU rules on cross border coversion, EU and member states – legal and economic issues. International Scientific Conference on EU and Member States – Legal and Economic Issues, no 943, pp. 345–354.

22. Anuar A. R., Harun A. (2019), Malaysia-Indonesia cross-border governance: Is there a trade-off between security and economic development?, Journal of International Studies, no 15, pp. 21–34.

23. Bohm H. (2021), Five Roles of Cross-border Cooperation Against Re-bordering, Journal Of Borderlands Studies, no 23 Jul. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2021.1948900.

24. Brunet-Jailly E. (2022), Cross-border cooperation: a global overview, Alternatives, vol. 47, iss. 1, no. 3, pp. 245–260. DOI: 10.1177/03043754211073463.

25. Cankar S. S., Seljak J., Petkovsek V. (2019), Factors that influence cross-border cooperation between businesses in the Alps-Adriatic region, MIMBAR: Jurnal Sosial dan Pembangunan, vol. 3, no. 10/E/KPT/2019. https://doi.org/10.29313/mimbar.v0i0.9422.

26. Celata F., Coletti R., Stocchiero A. (2016), Neighborhood Policy, Cross-border Cooperation and the Re-bordering of the Italy-Tunisia Frontier, Journal of Borderlands Studies, vol. 32, iss. 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2016.1222872.

27. Decoville A., Durand F. (2019), Exploring cross-border integration in Europe: How do populations cross borders and perceive their neighbours?, European Urban and Regional Studies, vol. 26, iss. 2. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776418756934.

28. Friedmann J. (1966), Regional Development Policy: A Case Study of Venezuela, MIT Press, 279 p.

29. Harguindeguy J. B., Sanchez A. S. (2017), European Cross-Border Regions as Policy-makers: A Comparative Approach, Journal of Borderlands Studies, vol. 32 (2), pp. 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2016.1195706.

30. Johnson C. M. (2009), Cross-border regions and territorial restructuring in central Europe room for more transboundary space, European urban and regional studies, vol. 16, iss. 2, p. 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776409102190.

31. Kaucic J., Sohn C. (2021), Mapping the cross-border cooperation 'galaxy': an exploration of scalar arrangements in Europe, European Planning Studies, no. 10 May. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1923667.

32. Kurowska-Pysz J., Castanho R. A. (2018), Gomez, JMN Cross-border cooperation – the barriers analysis and the recommendations, Polish Journal of Management Studies, no 17(2), рp. 32–38.

33. Lange E. (2018), Cross-border Cooperation in Action: Taking a Closer Look at the Galicia-North of Portugal European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation, Journal of borderlands studies, vol. 33, iss. 3.

34. Makkonen T., Williams A. M., Weidenfeld A., Kaisto V. (2018), Cross-border knowledge transfer and innovation in the European neighbourhood: Tourism cooperation at the Finnish-Russian border, Tourism Management, vol. 68. no. Oct., pp. 140–151.

35. Maslov Y. (2018), The EU strategy for the Danube region as an inclusive form of cross-border economy, Baltic Journal Of Economic Studies, vol. 4, no. 5

36. pp. 200–208. OI. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-5-200-208.

37. Molema M. (2018), Bright Ideas, Thick Institutions. Post-industrial Development Theories as Drivers of Cross-border Cooperation, Journal Of Borderlands Studies, vol. 36, iss. 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2018.1496467.

38. Sanguin A. L. (2013), Euroregions and other EU's cross-border organizations: the risk of confusion, redundancy, oversizing and entropy. A critical assessment, Annales, Ser. hist. social, vol. 23, no 1, pp. 155–164.

39. Studzieniecki T. (2016), The development of cross-border cooperation in an EU macroregion – a case study of the Baltic Sea Region, Procedia Economics and Finance, vol. 39, pp. 235–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671 (16)30318-5.

40. Van Tatenhove J. P. M. (2017), Transboundary marine spatial planning: a reflexive marine governance experiment?, Journal Of Environmental Policy & Planning, vol. 19, iss. 6. рp. 783–794. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1292120.

41. Zdrazil P., Kozun-Cieslak G. (2016), The importance of cross-border cooperation on regional development: evidence from the Euroregion Neisse, Proceedings of the 11th International Scientific Conference Public Administration, рp. 302–309.