PDF-файл статьи

Научная статья

Original article

УДК 339.972

doi: 10.55186/2413046X_2023_8_10_527

INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS OF ROMANIAN AGRICULTURE THROUGH ANGLO-SAXON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS VIEWS: DOCTRINAL CONTRADICTIONS

МЕЖДУНАРОДНАЯ КОНКУРЕНТОСПОСОБНОСТЬ РУМЫНСКОГО СЕЛЬСКОГО ХОЗЯЙСТВА ГЛАЗАМИ АНГЛОСАКСОНСКОЙ ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОЙ ШКОЛЫ: ДОКТРИНАЛЬНЫЕ ПРОТИВОРЕЧИЯ

Luchian Vladislav, postgraduate degree, department of world economy and international business, faculty of international economic relations, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation (49 Leningradsky Prospekt,
125993, Moscow, Russia), phone +7 499 943 98 55, adalman@mail.ru

Лукиан Владислав, аспирант, департамент мировой экономики и международного бизнеса, факультет международных экономических отношений, ФГОБУ ВО «Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации» (25167, Москва, пр-кт Ленинградский, д. 49/2),  тел. 8(499)943-98-55, adalman@mail.ru

Abstract. International competitiveness of national economy sectors has become an indispensable condition for the successful development of any state. Strategically verified use by the state of export potential, as a component of international competitiveness, of the national economy determines success in foreign trade markets. Assessment of the national economy development trajectory requires taking into account a wide range of indicators, which together allow us to analyze the position of the national economy in the world economy, the real growth rates of welfare and living standards of citizens. Foreign trade competitiveness naturally acts as a comprehensive indicator for assessing the development trajectory of the state. Internationally, there are many developed countries with similar standards of living, but not every country can have its own economic sectors in which it holds world domination. The success of a state on the world markets is not an algebraic sum of successes of some economic sector or companies separately, operating in different sectors or sub-sectors of the economy, but a synergy of the totality of competitive components of international competitiveness as a whole.

For Romania, as a member state of the European Union (hereinafter referred to as EU), it is especially important. The high level of integration into the EU economic processes, with relatively strong starting positions, allowed the country to strengthen its economic performance in a number of sectors, avoiding the insurmountable role of a system outsider on the export markets.

Аннотация. Международная конкурентоспособность отраслей национальной экономики стала неотъемлемым условием успешного развития любого государства. Стратегически выверенное использование государством экспортного потенциала, как составляющей международной конкурентоспособности, национальной экономики определяет успешность на внешнеторговых рынках. Оценка траектории развития национальной экономики требует учета широкого круга показателей, которые в совокупности позволяют проанализировать положение национальной экономики в мировом хозяйстве, реальные темпы роста благосостояния и уровень жизни граждан. Внешнеторговая конкурентоспособность естественным образом выступают как комплексный показатель оценки траектории развития государства.

На международном уровне существует много развитых стран с похожим уровнем жизни, но не у каждой могут быть свои экономические отрасли, в которых она удерживает мировое господство. Успех государства на мировых ранках – это неалгебраическая сумма успехов какой-то экономической отрасли или компаний в отдельности, работающих в различных секторах или подотраслях экономики, а синергия совокупности конкурентных слагаемых международной конкурентоспособности в целом.

Для Румынии, как страны-члена Европейского Союза (далее ЕС) — это особенно важно. Высокий уровень интеграции в экономические процессы ЕС при относительно сильных стартовых позициях, позволил стране усилить свои экономические показатели по целому ряду отраслей, избежав непреодолимую роль системного аутсайдера на экспортных рынках.

Keywords: Romania, agriculture, productivity, export potential, international competitiveness, Anglo-Saxon school, economic development

Ключевые слова: Румыния, сельское хозяйство, производительность, экспортный потенциал, международная конкурентоспособность, англосаксонская школа, экономическое развитие

General analysis. Modern national economies are open and interact with each other in three main ways: international trade, international financial relations and movement of factors of production. In recent decades, the tendency of states to increase the degree of openness of national economies has taken shape. This process has not only positive but also negative consequences. Some countries become leaders due to this, while others remain in less favorable positions. In order to benefit from the process of foreign trade economic interaction, states must be globally competitive.

Wilhelm von Hornik as early as in 1684, in the framework of the manifesto to the fundamental principles of development of the state economy, referred to the need for a systematic «search for favorable opportunities to sell surplus processed product to foreigners for gold and silver» [1]. The international competitiveness of any state is, firstly, the understanding of its strengths through the correct assessment of commodity and export resources, as well as the export potential of national industries [13]. Only (highly) competitive goods can be promoted in the foreign market. It is for this purpose that it is important for any state to understand the level of foreign trade competitiveness of the commodity nomenclature produced on its territory.

In economic doctrine there is a number of theories of «favorable participation of the state» in international economic relations. The author identifies the most important of them. Thus, Adam Smith in his work «An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations» (1776) laid the foundations of the «theory of absolute advantage» and put forward the theses that only rich nations can have advantages and therefore only for them the question of external equilibrium can be raised. Adam Smith believed that if a foreign country can supply us with goods cheaper than we ourselves can produce, the best solution is to acquire these goods in exchange for the part of domestic production in which we have an advantage [4]. Therefore, it is important for each nation to specialize in the production of the commodity in which it has an absolute advantage, which will allow all countries to obtain more output than if there were no such specialization. As long as a country has a natural or acquired advantage in a known good, and another country wishes to own that good, it will always be more profitable for the latter to buy it rather than produce it [20].

However, the British philosopher and economist John Stuart Mill introduced this doctrine into popular economic presentation through his Principles of Political Economy (1848) in which he outlined the arguments for and against government action in economic relations [15].

Another classical economist, David Ricardo, developed the «theory of absolute advantage» [19]. He relied on the concept of «comparative value» presented earlier by Robert Torrance (1780-1864) in his Essay on the External Corn Trade (1815). R. Torrens sought to demonstrate that comparative value can be beneficial for foreign trade, even if imported goods are obtained in the country of origin at higher prices than those that could be obtained in the importing country [18].

Following the analysis of economic prerequisites, a new concept (theory) of foreign trade was developed, which explains the existence of comparative advantages in the conditions of using the same technology in these countries. This theory proves that countries can benefit from specialization (including export specialization), even if one of them has an absolute advantage in the production of all economic goods [3].

The dynamics of comprehensive integration economic processes contributed to the formation of new economic and philosophical views on trade interactions between states. In 1960 Bertil Ohlin and Eli Heckscher (in European scientific sources appear as Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson or «HOS») [16], presented a theory of the ratio of factors of production. Heckscher-Ohlin models can be attributed to Ricardian economic views [19]. In this analysis we can include the concepts of «comparative advantage», «free trade», «obtaining benefits from trade by both countries involved in trade relations» [2].

Bertil Olin in his paper «Some Flaws in Theories of International Economic Relations» investigated the relationship between comparative advantage and economic growth. Thus, a state, in order to stimulate long-term economic growth, should take advantage of the advantages it possesses in addition to skilled labor, capital and technology [4].

If we analyze the views of M. Porter, it is important to emphasize that he proves that there is no country in the world that would be able to compete in all areas and at the same time have guarantees that it will be able to export to other countries infinitely long. Thus, there is no state that can gain and maintain an export advantage except through peaceful creative work with a clearly defined goal, accompanied by a number of sacrifices and losses. The international competitiveness of states is not, in our opinion, a monolithic concept, but consists of parts that systematically interact with each other. Here we can conclude that «the concept of international competitiveness» manifests itself in both aspects — tangible and intangible — to explain how a nation creates prosperity [14]. This aspect applies to the agriculture of nations as well.

The author of the article presents the author’s definition of «agricultural export potential» of the state, which should be understood as the existing and prospective ability of subjects of national agricultural subsectors of the economy (agricultural sectors of the state and its administrative-territorial divisions) to export agri-food products to the world market under a number of incentives and restrictions that depend on the commodity-resource base, the potential of the national economy and their demand on foreign trade markets.

A country with a competitive agricultural foreign trade potential is a runway for the development of a global strategy of its counterparties, which combines the advantages gained by companies within the country with opportunities for international competitive growth and economic superiority. These conclusions also confirm the views of J. Schumpeter, who argued that competition itself is very dynamic and that it is not a balance, but changes in constant motion [21]. 

Scientific novelty. The competitiveness of the Romanian export potential agriculture in the cross-section of the Anglo-Saxon neoliberal economic school views

The above-mentioned views of the representatives of the Anglo-Saxon neo-liberal economic school can hardly be considered as a theoretical basis in justifying the export potential of a number of sectors, including agriculture, which cannot be criticized, for the countries of the northern Black Sea region, including Romania. The author is inclined to argue that the basic theoretical principles and foundations of international competitiveness, born by the representatives of the British and American schools, do not reflect the peculiarities of the development of the modern system of Romanian agriculture and its foreign trade potential.

The Anglo-Saxon neoliberal economic ideology in the development of the concept of «international potential» takes as its foundation the priority of private over public, efficient over high-tech and «competitive development» [6]. The systemic attempts of the Romanian political elites to bring the foreign trade potential of agriculture under the «Anglo-Saxon clichés», where the basis is still «science» and «machine», but not «man» and a number of «humanitarian principles», are not so successful [10]. In fact, in our opinion, two incompatible values in economic development — systematized, analytically verified development and chaotic, not always consistent, systemic Romanian economic (agricultural) reality — meet antagonistically. To confirm the theoretical hypothesis, let us outline a number of arguments.

The Anglo-Saxon civilization, in the construction of which the Americans eventually took the upper hand, pushing the British aside, was historically based on the deficit of territories and resources, which was compensated by access to the sea and was formed by «internecine wars of local sovereigns» for access to new donor territories or «overseas riches» [8].

Romania since the Geto-Dac times and after the Roman Empire, which conquered these territories for many centuries ahead, historically did not seek new expansions, economic subjugations and clan supremacy. Neighboring states, such as Hungary or Bulgaria, have their origins in the invasion of nomadic ethnic groups (e.g., Finno-Ugric peoples who migrated historically from the steppes of Altai, etc.). The country in its geo-economic development has always been at the crossroads of interests of different empires: Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, Tsarist, Rzeczpospolita. We are inclined to assert that historically Romania has developed and still has an agricultural way of life [11].

Provision of its citizens at the expense of its own natural resources and labor did not lead to the development of practices of «economic enslavement or domination», as it was for the Anglo-Saxons in the time of, for example, the East Indian Companies or the Opium Wars in Asia. At the modern stage, in our opinion, this civilizational line has been consolidated into the concept of «global» or «international competitiveness» [2].

After the fading role of England as the main colonial leader, the USA organically borrowed the English economic and foreign trade system [6]. After World War II, the USA became the main conductor of Anglo-Saxon neoliberal values. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the countries of Eastern Europe also fell into the system of gravitation of American-centered forces [6]. However, the adoption of alien values in the development, including foreign trade, in a number of economic sectors did not take place.

Romania has never had the perception of statehood and its foreign economic doctrine through the prism of «island mentality» [9]. The preservation of this orientation in the export vector can also be traced in the new foreign trade strategy of the state adopted in October 2022 (until 2030), where Romania’s main foreign trade partners are designated: the Russian Federation, Turkey and Poland [14].

In the course of centuries, Romania had no lack of space and resources for a trouble-free agricultural development. The enrichment of national elites, as it was peculiar to the Anglo-Saxon system of foreign trade competition, was not formed by exploiting its own citizens or other states, dominions, colonies. On the contrary, the country, living for so many centuries under the Ottoman yoke, has formed a different system, including economic and foreign trade values, where the religious, cultural, humanitarian system of values alienates a number of Anglo-Saxon postulates.

Romanian economic and foreign trade policy has never been formed as «enslaving», «attacking», «dominating» or «divisive» [7]. The formation of Romania’s foreign trade policy in a system of conflict and point of clash of interests forced the nation to unite, forming a relatively closed, self-sufficient environment. The territory, throughout the whole retrospective of its formation, is connected to the Black Sea and the Danube, and thus a direct access to the «big water» [11].

Given its land, resource, geographic, climatic, religious (Christian) basis, Romania, unlike Anglo-Saxon foreign trade values, has emerged as an «export civilization of land» rather than «sea» [9]. The Carpathian-Danubian economic area, which, within the framework of the development of its agriculture, in general, and the building of its export potential, in particular, is guided by «giving» and «gathering» humanitarian, among other foundations [7]. This has also affected the ability to develop export potential, where (mainly Anglo-Saxon and Chinese traders) buy up the country’s exchange-traded crops for low costs, without contributing to the growth of the agricultural industry [12].

The export potential of the agricultural sector of the country clearly does not form under the realization of the strategy of qualitative growth and development, but rather quick sales and profits to cover only their needs and costs. Unlike Russia, the political elites do not actively show themselves in the categories of the state-system leader and «exporter of global food security» in the agricultural sector [7].

However, what Romania and Russia have in common in terms of agricultural development is the openness to humanitarian issues, as Romania, like Russia, has always emphasized «man» and «nature» in the development of its agriculture. This is alien to the Anglo-Saxon system. Thus, Romania emphasizes «man» over «not machine» in promoting its agricultural export potential.

A possible breakdown of this Anglo-Saxon paradigm of the sector’s development might be the impetus for a different approach in the strategy of the country’s efficient agricultural development. This has succeeded in the last 30 years, for example, in the high-tech IT and service sectors (banking, insurance, etc.), but not in the national agriculture.

The Romanian agrarian, like the Soviet (Russian) agrarian, has always «given back». The best breeding institutes (ornithology, etc.), departments of agricultural genetics, geodesy, hydrology, irrigation, etc. (which had fallen into disrepair in Romania) were formed by training Romanian specialists in the USSR. Romanian agrarians adopted and also «gave back» this experience. The Anglo-Saxon model, including the development of international competitiveness of agriculture, is based solely on the universal commercialization of knowledge, technologies and finished products.

In fact, we are talking about different systems of coordinates. On the one hand, «competitiveness and openness», on the other hand, «commercialization». The docking of the previously described values and doctrinal schools occurs in practice, since international competitiveness turns the subsector of the economy into an «object of systemic exploitation» rather than a progressive «subject of competitive development» [6].

In this Anglo-Saxon development value system of «national international competitiveness of agriculture» another dissonance occurs. It consists in the fact that it is alien to man (Romanian agrarian). He is driven into rigid design and behavioral standards. The agrarian and the industry follow this paradigm and lose their self-identity and self-development. The industry falls into a system of coordinates alien to it, becoming a raw material (agrarian) appendage. The ability to break out of this «Anglo-Saxon foreign trade paradigm» has not been successful to date.

The rhetorical question is whether the «system itself wants to let go of its vassal», a state with such a serious potential? In the same way, we believe it is right to present other Anglo-Saxon views of geo-economic and geopolitical supremacy. If we analyze the views of H. Mackinder we can note that he focused his attention on the geo-economic power of the Heartland («great natural fortress»), in the measure of high natural reserves and their inaccessibility to Britain or other «maritime power» («naval and merchant fleets») [12]. It is important to note that in his later works he introduced the term Eastern European «strategic Heartland». In this area he included the territories of Romania, adjacent to the Black Sea basin and countries with access to the Baltic Sea. In fact, he reproduced the areal of Huntington’s geo-economic and geopolitical inter-civilizational rift [8]. The importance of Romania within this concept of geo-economic Hartland is due to the fact that the fertile territories of the country can be connected with the «ocean» by narrow straits and fall under the control of states (formerly empires) of the «main core» — Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, Turkey (for example, the Rhine-Main-Danube-Black Sea canal).

The territory of Romania and the agricultural (export) potential of the countries of the northern Black Sea region, as a whole, acquire a special strategic importance in the world economy. It is here that modern major clashes and geo-economic conflicts are generated, noted by Mackinder and Huntington a century earlier: «Who controls Eastern Europe commands the Heartland; who controls the Heartland commands the World Island (i.e. Eurasia and Africa); who controls the World Island commands the world» [12].

Demonstrated after the concept of «international competitiveness» in synergy with the geo-economic postulates of the Anglo-Saxons are less related to the national interests of Romania, including agriculture.

Conclusions. Despite a number of potential opportunities, guided by the postulates of the theory of international competitiveness, we can conclude that not all states can obtain a «strong position in the world market», even if they do not have an absolute commodity, resource or export advantage. A state’s profit from foreign trade is mainly determined by the economic position of other states involved in the exchange, as well as by various opportunity costs for each country individually. At the same time, foreign trade supremacy and gains from trade arise when a country has a comparative advantage in the commodity and export resource and the production of that economic good. Without high competition on the national market and dynamic demand from domestic consumers, the export competitiveness of national economic sectors cannot develop.

The Romanian foreign trade potential of agriculture is characterized by the development in the paradigm of trade competitiveness rather than international competitiveness. At the same time, the principle of universal commercialization contradicts the very civilizational essence of Romania and its agriculture, where «man» and «nature» as a subject of «competitive development and growth» are in the center, and not «machine» and exclusively «profit». Romania and its agriculture were formed as a single consolidating and «giving» system, at the junction of geo-economic interests of global factors in the Balkans. At the same time, the Anglo-Saxon spatial-geographical model of national agricultural development is a closed «sea system». A system that seeks to exploit and capture the self-sufficient «land» model. At the same time, the realization of the Heartland strategy, but in a geo-economic cross-section, is detrimental to the international competitiveness of Romania’s agriculture. Therefore, the retransmission of knowledge and humanitarian principles within the framework of global food security is as important for Romania as it is for Russia.

References

1. Avtonomova V. Istoriya e`konomicheskix uchenij: uchebnoe posobie / V. Avtonomova, O. Anan`ina, N. Makasheva. – Moskva: INFRA-M, 2003 .– ISBN otsutstvuet. – 710 s.
2. Porter, M. Mezhdunarodnaya konkurenciya. Konkurentny`e preimushhestva stran. Per. s ang. I. V. Kvasyuka, – Moskva: Mezhdunarodny`e otnosheniya, 1993. – ISBN 5–7133–0413–2. – 896 s.
3. Rikardo, D. Nachala politicheskoj e`konomii i nalogovogo oblozheniya / D. Rikardo // Shedevry` mirovoj e`konomicheskoj my`sli. T.2. – Petr-k: Petrokom, 1993. – ISBN 978–5–17–151634–5. – 1040 s.
4. Smit, A. Issledovanie o prirode i prichinax bogatstv narodov / A. Smit // Shedevry` mirovoj e`konomicheskoj my`sli. – T.1. – Petr-k: Petro-kom, 1993. – ISBN otsutstvuet. – 570 s.
5. Dragan, D.G. Chernomorskij region: vzglyad iz Buxaresta / D.R. Dragan // Vestnik Diplomaticheskoj akademii MID Rossii. Rossiya i mir. 2019. – № 4 (22). – ISSN 2410–2415. – C. 103–113.
6. Kuzneczov, A.V. Anglosaksonskaya model` kapitalizma na puti postroeniya mnogopolyarnogo mira: vy`zov Rossii / A.V. Kuzneczov // E`konomiko-pravovy`e aspekty` realizacii strategii modernizacii Rossii: real`ny`e imperativy` dinamichnogo socioxozyajstvennogo razvitiya. sbornik statej mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii. – Krasnodar, 2014. – ISBN: 978–5–93926–261–3. – S. 179–185.
7. Lukian, V. «Zernovaya sdelka» i ee vliyanie na strany` Subsaxarskoj Afriki i Magriba: kejs Rumy`nii / V. Lukian // Vosxodyashhaya rol` Afriki v formiruyushhemsya miroporyadke: materialy` XXI Vserossijskoj shkoly` molody`x afrikanistov. – Moskva, 2022 goda. – ISSN 978–5–91298–286–6. – S. 143–155.
8. Lukian, V. «Chernomorskaya e`nergeticheskaya samodostatochnost`» Rumy`nii ili bezal`ternativnoe gazovoe partnyorstvo s Rossiej / V. Lukian // E`konomika i predprinimatel`stvo. – 2021. – № 2 (137). – ISSN: 1999–2300. – S. 277–285.
9. Lukian, V. 30 let e`konomicheskix reform i 15 let s momenta vstupleniya Rumy`nii v ES: ot kommunizma k kapitalizmu / V. Lukian // E`konomika i predprinimatel`stvo. – 2022. – № 2 (139). – ISSN 1999–2300. – S. 1161–1170.
10. Lukian, V. Vliyanie «zernovoj sdelki» na mirovy`e ry`nki birzhevogo prodovol`stviya: primer stran severnogo Prichernomor`ya (Rumy`niya, Rossiya, Ukraina) / V. Lukian // International agricultural journal. – 2022. – № 10. – ISSN 2587–6740. – C. 796–810.
11. Lukian, V. Razvitie sel`skogo xozyajstva Rumy`nii na sovremennom e`tape / V. Lukian // E`konomika sel`skoxozyajstvenny`x i pererabaty`vayushhix predpriyatij. – 2022. – № 11. – ISSN 0235–2494. – S. 76–82.
12. Lukian, V. Sovremennoe sostoyanie i bar`ery` razvitiya sel`skogo xozyajstva Rumy`nii / V. Lukian // Moskovskij e`konomicheskij zhurnal. – 2022. № 10. –– ISSN 2413–046X. – C. 71–106.
13. Orlova, N.L. Resurs: novoe prochtenie i geoe`konomicheskoe izmerenie e`ksportnogo potenciala. Nauchnaya monografiya / N. L. Orlova // Izdatel`sko-torgovaya korporaciya «Dashkov i K°». – 2016. – DOI otsutstvuet. – ISBN 978-5-394-02669-0. – 459 c.
14. Zamfir, C. O analiza critică a tranziției: Ce va fi – după / C. Zamfir. –Bucureşti: POLIROM, 2019. – DOI otsutstvuet. – ISBN 973–681–753–9. – 656 p.
15. Mill, J.S. Principles of Political Economy with Some of their Applications to Social Philosophy (1848) / J.S. Mill // London: John W. Parker. – 2012. – DOI otsutstvuet. – ISBN 978-0598983848. – P. 214-232.
16. Ohlin, B. Some Insufficiencies in The Theories of International Economic Relations / B. Ohlin. – Princeton, 1979. – DOI 10.1108/09513550510624077. – ISBN otsutstvuet. – P. 612-632.
17. Porter, M.E. The competitive advantage of nations / M.E. Porter // London: MacMillan. – 1995.– DOI 10.1007/978–1–349–11336–1. – ISBN otsutstvuet. – P. 1–25.
18. Ricardo, D. On the principles of political economy and taxation / D. Recardo – Ontario, – 1995. – DOI 10.1017/CBO9781107589421. – ISBN 9781107589421. – 333 p.

Список источников

1. Автономова В. История экономических учений: учебное пособие / В. Автономова, О. Ананьина, Н. Макашева. – Москва: ИНФРА-М, 2003 .– ISBN отсутствует. – 710 с.
2. Портер, М. Международная конкуренция. Конкурентные преимущества стран. Пер. с анг. И. В. Квасюка, – Москва: Международные отношения, 1993. – ISBN 5–7133–0413–2. – 896 с.
3. Рикардо, Д. Начала политической экономии и налогового обложения / Д. Рикардо // Шедевры мировой экономической мысли. Т.2. – Петр-к: Петроком, 1993. – ISBN 978–5–17–151634–5. – 1040 с.
4. Смит, А. Исследование о природе и причинах богатств народов / А. Смит // Шедевры мировой экономической мысли. – Т.1. – Петр-к: Петро-ком, 1993. – ISBN отсутствует. – 570 с.
5. Драган, Д.Г. Черноморский регион: взгляд из Бухареста / Д.Р. Драган // Вестник Дипломатической академии МИД России. Россия и мир. 2019. – № 4 (22). – ISSN 2410–2415. – C. 103–113.
6. Кузнецов, А.В. Англосаксонская модель капитализма на пути построения многополярного мира: вызов России / А.В. Кузнецов // Экономико-правовые аспекты реализации стратегии модернизации России: реальные императивы динамичного социохозяйственного развития. сборник статей международной научно-практической конференции. – Краснодар, 2014. – ISBN: 978–5–93926–261–3. – С. 179–185.
7. Лукиан, В. «Зерновая сделка» и ее влияние на страны Субсахарской Африки и Магриба: кейс Румынии / В. Лукиан // Восходящая роль Африки в формирующемся миропорядке: материалы XXI Всероссийской школы молодых африканистов. – Москва, 2022 года. – ISSN 978–5–91298–286–6. – С. 143–155.
8. Лукиан, В. «Черноморская энергетическая самодостаточность» Румынии или безальтернативное газовое партнёрство с Россией / В. Лукиан // Экономика и предпринимательство. – 2021. – № 2 (137). – ISSN: 1999–2300. – С. 277–285.
9. Лукиан, В. 30 лет экономических реформ и 15 лет с момента вступления Румынии в ЕС: от коммунизма к капитализму / В. Лукиан // Экономика и предпринимательство. – 2022. – № 2 (139). – ISSN 1999–2300. – С. 1161–1170.
10. Лукиан, В. Влияние «зерновой сделки» на мировые рынки биржевого продовольствия: пример стран северного Причерноморья (Румыния, Россия, Украина) / В. Лукиан // International agricultural journal. – 2022. – № 10. – ISSN 2587–6740. – C. 796–810.
11. Лукиан, В. Развитие сельского хозяйства Румынии на современном этапе / В. Лукиан // Экономика сельскохозяйственных и перерабатывающих предприятий. – 2022. – № 11. – ISSN 0235–2494. – С. 76–82.
12. Лукиан, В. Современное состояние и барьеры развития сельского хозяйства Румынии / В. Лукиан // Московский экономический журнал. – 2022. № 10. –– ISSN 2413–046X. – C. 71–106.
13. Орлова, Н.Л. Ресурс: новое прочтение и геоэкономическое измерение экспортного потенциала. Научная монография / Н. Л. Орлова // Издательско-торговая корпорация «Дашков и К°». – 2016. – DOI отсутствует. – ISBN 978-5-394-02669-0. – 459 c.
14. Zamfir, C. O analiza critică a tranziției: Ce va fi – după / C. Zamfir. –Bucureşti: POLIROM, 2019. – DOI отсутствует. – ISBN 973–681–753–9. – 656 p.
15. Mill, J.S. Principles of Political Economy with Some of their Applications to Social Philosophy (1848) / J.S. Mill // London: John W. Parker. – 2012. – DOI отсутствует. – ISBN 978-0598983848. – P. 214-232.
16. Ohlin, B. Some Insufficiencies in The Theories of International Economic Relations / B. Ohlin. – Princeton, 1979. – DOI 10.1108/09513550510624077. – ISBN отсутствует. – P. 612-632.
17. Porter, M.E. The competitive advantage of nations / M.E. Porter // London: MacMillan. – 1995.– DOI 10.1007/978–1–349–11336–1. – ISBN отсутствует. – 1–25.
18. Ricardo, D. On the principles of political economy and taxation / D. Recardo – Ontario, – 1995. – DOI 10.1017/CBO9781107589421. – ISBN 9781107589421. – 333 p.

Для цитирования: Luchian V., International competitiveness of Romanian agriculture through Anglo-Saxon school of economics views: doctrinal contradictions // Московский экономический журнал. 2023. № 10. URL: https://qje.su/selskohozyajstvennye-nauki/moskovskij-ekonomicheskij-zhurnal-10-2023-51/

© Лукиан В., 2023. Московский экономический журнал, 2023, № 10.