Person: Vashkinskaya, Ekaterina
Loading...
Email Address
AA Acceptance Date
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
Vashkinskaya
First Name
Ekaterina
Name
Vashkinskaya, Ekaterina
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Publication A Growth Diagnostic of Kazakhstan(Center for International Development at Harvard University, 2023-02) Hausmann, Ricardo; Taniparti, Nikita; Brenot, Clement; Barrios, Douglas; Soylu, Can; El Houda, Roukaya; Vashkinskaya, Ekaterina; Belostecinic, Felicia; Henn, SophiaThis Growth Diagnostic Report was generated as part of a research engagement between the Growth Lab at Harvard University and the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC) between June 2021 and December 2022. The purpose of the engagement was to formulate evidence-based policy options to address critical issues facing the economy of Kazakhstan through innovative frameworks such as growth diagnostics and economic complexity. This report is accompanied by the Economic Complexity Report that applies findings from this report on economy-wide challenges to growth and diversification in order to formulate attractive and feasible opportunities for diversification. Kazakhstan faces multifaceted challenges to sustainable and inclusive growth: macroeconomic uncertainty, an uneven economic playing field, and difficulties in acquiring productive capabilities, agglomerating them locally, and accessing export markets. Underlying Kazakhstan’s transformational growth in the last two decades—during which real GDP per capita multiplied by 2.5x—are two periods that underscore how Kazakhstan’s growth trajectory has been correlated with oil and gas dynamics. The early and mid-2000s characterized by the global commodity supercycle led to an expansion of the economy upwards of 8% annually, with a mild slowdown during the global financial crisis. In 2014, Kazakhstan’s growth slowed with the collapse of commodity prices, and alternative engines of growth have not been strong enough to fend against volatility since. These trends, along with growing uncertainty in the long-run demand of oil and gas, continue to highlight the limitations of relying on natural resources to drive development. As in the experience of other major oil producers, diversification of Kazakhstan’s non-oil economy is a critical pathway to drive a new era of sustainable and inclusive growth and mitigate the impacts of commodity price shocks on the country’s economy. Kazakhstan’s growth trajectory demonstrates that the country has enough oil to suffer symptoms of Dutch disease, but not enough to position it as a reliable engine of growth in the future. Development of non-oil activities has been a policy objective of the government of Kazakhstan for some time, but previous efforts for target sectors have failed to generate sufficient exports and investments to produce alternative engines of growth. This report characterizes the relationship between growth, industrial policy, and the constraints to diversification in Kazakhstan. It utilizes the growth diagnostics framework to understand why efforts to diversify into non-oil tradables has been challenging. The report proposes a growth syndrome to explain the constraints preventing Kazakhstan from achieving productive diversification and sustainable growth.Publication Growth Through Inclusion in South Africa(Center for International Development at Harvard University, 2023-11) Hausmann, Ricardo; O'Brien, Timothy; Fortunato, Andres; Lochmann, Alexia; Shah, Kishan; Venturi Grosso, Lucila; ENCISO VALDIVIA, SHEYLA; Vashkinskaya, Ekaterina; Ahuja, Ketan; Klinger, Bailey; Sturzenegger, Federico; Tokman, MarceloIt is painfully clear that South Africa is performing poorly, exacerbating problems such as inequality and exclusion. The economy’s ability to create jobs is slowing, worsening South Africa’s extreme levels of unemployment and inequality. South Africans are deeply disappointed with social progress and dislike the direction where the country seems to be heading. Despite its enviable productive capabilities, the national economy is losing international competitiveness. As the economy staggers, South Africa faces deteriorating social indicators and declining levels of public satisfaction with the status quo. After 15 years, attempts to stimulate the economy through fiscal policy and to address exclusion through social grants have failed to achieve their goals. Instead, they have sacrificed the country's investment grade, increasing the cost of capital to the whole economy, with little social progress to show for it. The underlying capabilities to achieve sustained growth by leveraging the full capability of its people, companies, assets, and knowhow remain underutilized. Three decades after the end of apartheid, the economy is defined by stagnation and exclusion, and current strategies are not achieving inclusion and empowerment in practice. This report asks the question of why. Why is the economy growing far slower than any reasonable comparator countries? Why is exclusion so extraordinarily high, even after decades of various policies that have aimed to support socio-economic transformation? What would it take for South Africa to include more of its people, capabilities, assets, and ideas in the functioning of the economy, and why aren’t such actions being undertaken already? The Growth Lab has completed a deep diagnostic of potential causes of South Africa’s prolonged underperformance over a two-year research project. Building on the findings of nine papers and widespread collaboration with government, academics, business and NGOs, this report documents the project’s central findings. Bluntly speaking, the report finds that South Africa is not accomplishing its goals of inclusion, empowerment and transformation, and new strategies and instruments will be needed to do so. We found two broad classes of problems that undermine inclusive growth in the Rainbow Nation: collapsing state capacity and spatial exclusion.Publication Growth Diagnostics and Competitiveness Study of the Manufacturing Sector in Tanzania(Center for International Development at Harvard University, 2023-06) Klinger, Bailey; Santos, Miguel Angel; Arroyo From, Camila; Vashkinskaya, EkaterinaTanzania’s manufacturing puzzles (and frustrations) seem to be a natural outcome of their policy choice. The Tanzanian economy experienced a significant acceleration over two decades, growing at a compounded annual growth rate of 6% between 1998 and 2018: Largest rates were recorded and sustained by the super commodity cycle (2005-2014). Within that growth trajectory, manufacturing’s share of gross domestic product (GDP) has lingered for 30 years below 10% – well below the 23% target established for 2025 in Tanzania’s Industrial Development Strategy (2011). As stressed by Diao et al (2021), the bulk of manufacturing value added is created by a few capital-intensive firms, whereas informal manufacturing has increased employment but without significant improvements in productivity/wages. Manufacturing exports surged in 2011 and remained steady since driven by subsector basic metals (gold & unrefined copper). If these are excluded, the curve mirrors the commodity price boom (likely a price boom rather than a volume boom). Looking only at exports conceals the fact that the bulk of the manufacturing output in Tanzania is sold in the domestic market rather than exported: exports are equivalent to less than 2% of GDP; domestic sales are seven times higher. While Food and Beverages make up for the largest share of manufacturing value employment and value-added, basic metals are the ones accounting for the vast majority of Tanzania’s exports. The most binding constraint to investments in manufacturing in Tanzania is the availability and quality of electricity supply: Access to electricity is the lowest among peers, with large disparities between rural (22%) and urban (70%). Electrical outages are frequent and expensive for the manufacturing sector; firms even plan their production schedules and decide on plant locations based on power reliability. And yet, when we analyze the share of value-added against energy intensity at the sub-sector level, the negative relationship to be expected if electricity is indeed the constraint is there, but too fragile and noisy. Why? The strongest evidence points to the role of trade protection in compensating firms for other constraints, allowing existing manufacturers to capture large shares of domestic value-added while remaining uncompetitive in export markets. Large manufacturing subsectors of moderate to high energy intensity and more capital intensive enjoy higher tariff protection, creating a wedge that allows these industries to thrive in the domestic market. Despite joining numerous free trade agreements, Tanzania remains one of the most restrictive countries from a trade standpoint, eased by filing exceptions that shield individual products and entire domestic industries from competition. We have also found that effective taxation in Tanzania is relatively higher on labor (lower on capital, materialized through massive tax holidays granted within SEZ), skewing returns away from the country’s relative labor abundance. Failure to address the binding constraints creates a rationale for upholding protection, which reinforces biases towards capital and energy-intensive sectors. These policies go a long way in explaining the Tanzanian manufacturing puzzle.