Search results

The purpose of this paper is to show how institutional conditions affect food security at the national level.

A qualitative research with the usage of the methods of institutional, evolutionary, comparative and retrospective analysis is performed in this paper. During the study, emphasis was placed on the theory of sustainable development, the theory of economic security, the theory of economic systems and the theory of competitive advantages.

Food security policies can be based on the use of the liberal or conservative paradigm. The liberal paradigm focuses on food supply. The conservative paradigm also considers food independence. The growth of global instability has led to increased use of the conservative paradigm. Within the framework of these paradigms, four alternative models of food security have been proposed: “Pure” market, procurement, distribution, directive. For their selection, the matrix method was used. The combination of market and nonmarket management methods in the production and distribution of food is considered. Each of the models is given a meaningful interpretation, and their strengths and weaknesses are identified, the conditions of applicability and efficiency factors are indicated.

The failure of the authorities to provide the population with access to food is largely determined by institutional factors. The system of national institutions sets limits for food security. The main limitations are: technological, land, labor, infrastructure, cluster, ecological. To overcome them, it is recommended to use the tools of innovative, scientific, technological, migration, financial, investment, cluster, sustainable development and other types of state policies. Institutional shocks that lead to crises have a significant impact on food security. The study, using the example of Russia, shows that effective institutional overcoming of them is possible using the conservative paradigm.

In the literature on peace and security, we identify at least two different uses of the term Eurasia. One stakes a rather narrow geographic boundary while the second includes a much broader region. If we adopt the narrower view, Eurasia incorporates the fifteen republics of the former Soviet Union and possibly their security zones in Eastern Europe. Choosing to see Eurasia more broadly means defining it as the huge land-mass that comprises the continents of Europe and Asia. We may call the narrower definition Eurasia Minor and the broader one Eurasia Major.

Regional civilizations have existed for more than 5,000 years. Each has evolved from primitive, social and political systems into much more complex ones to meet the challenges of historical ages and successive world civilizations (Yakovets, 2000). In the third millennium, regional civilizations face a new challenge – globalization and post-industrial world civilization.

A nuclear future cannot be outlined in isolation from general trends of world development. After the fall of Communism in Central and Eastern Europe as well as in the former Soviet Union, there was much optimism and hope in the West. The end of the Cold War decreased radically the risk of nuclear war in Europe and in the other parts of the world. At the time, many believed that the main global, political and ideological confrontation had been eliminated erasing the very raison d’être for nuclear deterrence. The need for nuclear weapons, at least with regard to the most important and dangerous East-West axis of world politics, had been removed. In addition, globalization was engaging nations in an interconnected economy and integrated society, providing the conditions considered necessary for international stability. The prospect of a less conflicted and more peaceful world caused many to believe that the role of nuclear weapons would decrease as tensions relaxed and stability restored.

Rafis Abazov is an adjunct lecturer at the Harriman Institute at Columbia University, New York. He is the author of The Formation of Post-Soviet International Politics in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan (1999), the Freedom House Report on Kyrgyzstan (2002 and 2003), the Historical Dictionary of Kyrgyzstan (2004), and Historical Dictionary of Turkmenistan, as well as numerous articles on economic and political development in Central Asia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan. He has contributed articles to the Encyclopedia of Modern Asia, and the Encyclopedia of National Economies.