Impact of crisis in Russia–Ukraine relations on cross-border interactions in Belgorod oblast

Zayats, Dmitriy Viktorovich; Зотова, М. В.; Turov, Nikita; Klyuchnikov, M. I.

doi:10.1134/s2079970517040104

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Urban expansion-extension and inclusion-was facilitated by industrial development, the emergence of Kharkiv as a nexus of higher education (i.e., there are 34 universities located there), and numerous city parks created over 100 years ago. However, due to a combination of social factors and the border conflict with Russia population growth has decreased [32]. Given Kharkiv's increase in land consumption over the past 40 years (from 241.79 km 2 in 1975 to 446.47 km 2 in 2015) and decrease in population since 1990, Kharkiv is a city where infill is a strategy for planning initiatives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These cities were seen as a labor resource, where the urban population grew mainly due to extensive development of industry [30]. Kharkiv continues to be influenced by its proximity to Russia and the ongoing border conflict that arguably remains the most contentious post-Soviet Union border conflict [31,32]. Loss in urban population since 1995 [23], and migration to other urban areas across Ukraine has continued [30].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

SDG Indicator 11.3.1 and Secondary Cities: An Analysis and Assessment

Laituri

Davis

Sternlieb

et al. 2021

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Secondary cities are rapidly growing areas in low- and middle-income countries that lack data, planning, and essential services for sustainable development. Their rapid, informal growth patterns mean secondary cities are often data-poor and under-resourced, impacting the ability of governments to target development efforts, respond to emergencies, and design sustainable futures. The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11 focuses on inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable cities and human settlements. SDG Indicator (SDGI) 11.3.1 calculates the ratio of land consumption rate to population growth rate to enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization. Our paper compares three cities—Denpasar, Indonesia; Kharkiv, Ukraine; and Mekelle, Ethiopia—that were part of the Secondary Cities (2C) Initiative of the U.S. Department of State, Office of the Geographer and Global Issues to assess SDGI 11.3.1. The 2C Initiative focused on field-based participatory mapping for data generation to assist city planning. Urban form and population data are critical for calculating and visually representing this ratio. We examine the spatial extent of each city to assess land use efficiency (LUE) and track changes in urban form over time. With limited demographic and spatial data for secondary cities, we speculate whether SDGI 11.3.1 is useful for small- and medium-sized cities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

SDG Indicator 11.3.1 and Secondary Cities: An Analysis and Assessment

Laituri

Davis

Sternlieb

et al. 2021

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most important challenge is the crisis in Ukraine which has caused numerous negative consequences for border regions of both countries: (i) the increase in socio-economic gradients between neighbouring Russian and Ukrainian regions; (ii) the break of co-operation agreements; (iii) the massive closure of checkpoints and the complication of the border crossing regime, radical changes in the logistical schemes of many enterprises; (iv) a sharp decline in trade and the need to find new markets; (v) the reduction of passenger traffic and the drop in the number of border crossings by individuals. The situation is greatly complicated by the extreme uncertainty in the prospects for relations between Russia and Ukraine, the future of the Donetsk and Luhansk People Republics (DPR and LPR), which prevent local authorities and economic actors from building long-term plans (Zayats, Zotova, Turov, & Klyuchnikov, 2017).…”

Section: Geopolitical Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Russian borderlands: Contemporary problems and challenges

Колосов

Sebentsov

2020

Regional Science Policy & Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Russia has the largest number of neighbours in the world, with 16 different countries distributed along its more than 20,000 km land border. The diversity of situations in border regions offers an opportunity to study and to compare the influence of historical, cultural and geopolitical factors on the economic development of border regions, everyday life of population and interactions with the neighbours. The paper summarizes the results of recent projects devoted to Russian borderlands. It is based on the concept of bordering and a study of social practices. All Russian borders are analysed as a single system. The authors consider the impact of the 2014 crisis in Ukraine and the following geopolitical events on cross-border interactions of Russian border regions and analyse the effects of border location on the development of Russian regions. A special attention is paid to the combined influence on bordering of both "hard," "material" (the demographic situation, the territorial pattern of settlements and economy, etc.) and "soft" factors (the role of a border in territorial identities, political discourses and the perception of a neighbouring country, etc.). The fragmentation of the border space and the increasing asymmetry of socioeconomic indicators and cross-border interactions between neighbouring territories are shown.

show abstract

Casualties of border changes: evidence from nighttime lights and plant exit

Behrens

2024

Economic Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the economic effects of the Russia-Ukraine conflict—following the 2014 annexation of Crimea—on Russian border regions. While southern regions gained market access to Crimea, northern regions lost market access to Ukraine. Using nighttime lights data and geo-referenced plant-level data, we find that regions with deteriorating market access saw 43% less growth in lights—translating into 6%–12% lower growth in GDP depending on the assumed lights-GDP elasticity—and a 35% percent increase in the exit probability for manufacturing plants after 2014. Exploiting variations in closed local border crossings in the northern regions, we find that these effects may be partly driven by less cross-border labor flows.

show abstract

Impact of crisis in Russia–Ukraine relations on cross-border interactions in Belgorod oblast

Cited by 4 publications

References 6 publications

SDG Indicator 11.3.1 and Secondary Cities: An Analysis and Assessment

SDG Indicator 11.3.1 and Secondary Cities: An Analysis and Assessment

Russian borderlands: Contemporary problems and challenges

Casualties of border changes: evidence from nighttime lights and plant exit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About