Impact of a border position on the regions’ foreign trade cooperation

Purpose: to assess the impact of a border position on trade interaction between Russian and Belarusian regions.

Methods: the study used statistical methods for analyzing indicators of socio-economic development of the regions, general logical methods of comparison and generalization, as well as gravity and Dixit-Stiglitz-Krugman models.

Results: as a result of assessing indicators of socio-economic development of the Russian-Belarusian border regions, it was found that the influence of the border position on the regions’ foreign trade interaction is heterogeneous and depends on a combination of spatial and sectoral factors. Calculations of elasticity coefficients have shown that for the border regions the volume of industrial production and transport accessibility are significant determinants of foreign trade flows, while the price factor is less stable. Comparison of the industry profiles of the Russian regions bordering the Republic of Belarus (Smolensk, Pskov and Bryansk) made it possible to identify groups of the regions with pronounced industry connectivity, primarily in the chemical industry, mechanical engineering and process manufacturing.

Conclusions and Relevance: the results obtained confirm that the presence of a border position itself is not a sufficient condition for formation of stable foreign trade relations and requires taking into account the sectoral structure of the regional economy. The spatial and sectoral interpretation of the results made it possible to identify the complementary specialization profiles of the regions, which allowed substantiating directions of cross-border cooperation development and clarifying the guidelines for spatial development of Russia and Belarus border regions. The practical significance of the study lies in possibility of using the findings in the development of regional policy measures and strategies for the socio-economic development of the border areas.

1. Gubin A.M. Economic integration of regional systems: status and prospects for development in the transformation of global economic relations. Creative Economy. 2022; 16(10):3751–3770. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/nqifhx. https://doi.org/10.18334/ce.16.10.116400 (In Russ.)

2. Stroev P.V., Dudnik A.I. Particularities of territory connectivity management: Eastern vector. Journal of Economics, entrepreneurship and law. 2022; 12(10):2677–2686. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/xbxykf. https://doi.org/10.18334/epp.12.10.116392 (In Russ.)

3. Jakubowski A., Wójcik P. Towards cohesion at the interface between the European Union states? Cross-border asymmetry and convergence. Regional Studies. 2024; 58(1):194–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2023.2187767 (In Eng.)

4. Priebe M., Herberg J. Regioning mission-oriented innovation policy: The articulation of directionality between federal and regional arenas in the German High-Tech Strategy. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 2024; 52:100899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2024.100899 (In Eng.)

5. Pomfret R. Searching for a new institutional structure for the global trade system: What role for Asia in the age of US-China competition? Asia and the Global Economy. 2023; 3(2):100068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aglobe.2023.100068 (In Eng.)

6. Butorina O.V., Borko Yu.A. Benefits of regional integration: Redefining the concept. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2022; 92(S2):S105–S112. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/paygke. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1019331622080020 (In Eng.)

7. Katrovskiy A.P., Nizhnikova A.K. Russian-Belarusian border region as an intercapital region. Science. Innovations. Technologies. 2021; (1):65–88. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ysfrvl. https://doi.org/10.37493/2308-4758.2021.1.5 (In Russ.)

8. Rubtsov G.G., Litvinenko A.N. Role of inter-regional cooperation in modern regional economy of Russian Federation. St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Economics. 2019; 12(1):97–110. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/yzptbr. https://doi.org/10.18721/JE.12108 (In Russ.)

9. Musatov D.V., Savvateev A.V. Mathematical models of stable jurisdiction partitions: A survey of results and new directions. Journal of the New Economic Association. 2022; (2(54)):12–38. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/dnhtnp. https://doi.org/10.31737/2221-2264-2022-54-2-1 (In Russ.)

10. Zaenchkovsky A.E. Methods for modeling innovation logistics in a difficult-to-formalize description of the external environment. Scientific Journal Economic Sciences. 2011; (82):145–148. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/oyugmx (In Russ.)

11. Kolomak E.A. Urbanization resource in Russia. Spatial economics. 2019; (4):59–74. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/vdwfad. https://doi.org/10.14530/se.2015.4.059-074 (In Russ.)

12. Smirnov I.S. Gravity models for international trade analysis: Testing the country similarity theory 50 years later. Regional Research. 2020; (2(68)):52–62. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/oyjhsz. https://doi.org/10.5922/1994-5280-2020-2-4 (In Russ.)

13. Izotov D.A. New economic geography: the possibilities and restrictions. Spatial economics. 2013; (3):124–160. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/sbppkf (In Russ.)

14. Shumilov A.V. Estimating gravity models of international trade: A survey of methods. The HSE Economic Journal. 2017; 21(2):224–250. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/zfvtsl (In Russ.)

15. Beenstock M. Integrating macroeconomics and economic geography: the neoclassical growth model in spatial general equilibrium. Spatial Economic Analysis. 2024; 19(3):309–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/17421772.2023.2209598 (In Eng.)

16. Commendatore P., Kubin I., Sushko I. Big or small? A new economic geography model with an endogenous switch in the market structure. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 2022; 161:112257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112257 (In Eng.)

17. Zakharova E.A., Davydov D.V. New economic geography in explaining spatial development. Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. 2022; (6(464)):9–20. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ukyqjd. https://doi.org/10.47475/1994-2796-2022-10602 (In Russ.)

18. Zhang W.B. Increasing returns and economic geography with Solow-Uzawa, Dixit-Stiglitz, and Krugman unified. Spatial economics. 2020; 16(2):19–38. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ooabiu. https://doi.org/10.14530/se.2020.2.019-038 (In Eng.)

19. Zakharova E.A., Davydov D.V., Zemtsova E.M. New economic geography: thirty years later. St. Petersburg University Journal of Economic Studies. 2023; 39(1):127–155. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/nuykpt. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu05.2023.106 (In Russ.)

20. Kokovin S., Molchanov P., Bykadorov I. Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade: Revisiting gains from trade. Journal of International Economics. 2022; 137:103595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2022.103595 (In Eng.)

21. Mishura A.V. The estimation of gravity models of Russian interregional trade in monopolistically competitive goods. World of Economics and Management. 2012; 12(4):52–58. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/puahqb (In Russ.)

22. Fujita M., Mori T. Frontiers of the new economic geography. Papers in Regional Science. 2005; 84(3):377–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2005.00021.x

23. Yan Y., Cui Q. The impact of urban innovation on migrant settlement: Evidence from China. Economic Analysis and Policy. 2025; 86:2114–2131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2025.05.043 (In Eng.)

24. Vasilyeva R.I., Voitenkov V.A., Urazbaeva A.R. Modelling of the influence of regional determinants on export diversification in Russia. Journal of Applied Economic Research. 2022; 21(1):79–100. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ztfuqr. https://doi.org/10.15826/vestnik.2022.21.1.004 (In Russ.)

25. Borisov V., Fedulov Y., Dli M., Zaenchkovsky A. Method for identification, stability analysis and the dynamics monitoring of sociotechnical clusters. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series. VI International Scientific and Practical Conference “Virtual Simulation, Prototyping and Industrial Design 2019, VSPID-2019”, 16–18 October 2019, Tambov, Russia. 2020; 1553:012018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1553/1/012018 (In Eng.)