Research Problem

1. The Black Sea Region in a Multi-Dimensional Perspective: An Experiment With 5 Indiceswww.worldpolities.orgТимофеев И.Н. (С)

2. Research Problem • Countries of the Black Sea regionpossess unique features and characteristics, play specific roles in the region and in the world, have different levels and stages of development, particular national agendas, various political systems and regimes, etc. • What is their place in the regional and international system? • Do these countries have any common typological features? • Do they face the same challenges and resources to counteract them? • Political Atlas of the Modern World: An “Analytical Lens” to approach the problem.

3. Political Atlas of the Modern World • Project of MGIMO-University and Institute for Social Design. • Unified Database (70 variables, 192 countries). • Statistical analysis (correlation, discriminant analysis, factor analysis, cluster analysis). • Recognized sources of quantitative data - UN, UNESCO, World Bank, national statistics, etc. • What affects the position and role of a particular country in the structure of international system?

4. Among the factors: • Ability to respond to external and internal threats and challenges • Capacity to influence international environment • Ability to maintain the well-being of the population • Efficiency of the state (“stateness”) • Institutional basis of democracy (traditions of competition, representation, participation, executive constraints, constitutionalism)

5. 5 Indices (1) Index of national threats (2) Index of capacity for international influence (3) Quality of life index (4) Index of state consistency (5) Index of institutional basis of democracy

6. Index of national threats • Threats of external aggression • Terrorist threats (from abroad or within) • Territorial disputes • Separatist and/or antigovernment activities • Nonviolent secessionist movements • Military governments or attempts of military coups • Water shortage • Undernourishment and famine • HIV/AIDS epidemic • Excessive migration • Depopulation • Undiversified exports • Constant trade deficit • Dependence on fuel imports • Potential natural disasters

7. Index of capacity for international influence • Share of world GDP • Share of world goods and services exports • Contribution to the UN regular budget • IMF member’s voting power • Membership in the Paris club (official creditors) • Permanent membership in the UN Security Council • Military expenditures • Armed forces personnel • Nuclear weapons • Advanced military systems (4th-5th generation combat aviation) • Military deployments abroad • Share of world population • Nobel prize winners

8. Quality of life index • Life expectancy at birth • Death rate (communicable diseases) • Death rate (injuries) • Infant mortality • GDP per capita • Public health expenditure per capita • Involvement ratio for primary, secondary and tertiary schools

9. Index of state consistency • Duration of sovereign stateness • Foreign aid, % of GNI • Indebtedness • Foreign military presence/deployment in the country • Casualties of internal conflicts • Regions involved in internal conflicts • Intensity of internal conflicts • Applications for patents by residents – vs. applications by non-residents • Ethnic composition (share of ethnic majority) • Exchange rate arrangement

10. Index of Institutional Basis of Democracy • Parliamentary elections competition • Head of the executive elections competition • Duration of an uninterrupted minimal political competition tradition (since 1945) • Electoral inclusiveness (share of registered voters to overall population) • Competitive elections without interruptions after WWI • Referendum to extend term for the head of state/executive • Military coups or unconstitutional regime changes during last 33 years • More than 2 terms held by the head of state/executive • Influence of parliament on the appointment of government • Share of women in parliament (lower chamber)

11. Index of national threats: sample rating

12. Index of national threats: some findings • Most countries under study are characterized by relatively low level of threats. They are not the most secure and safe places, but the scope of their internal and external threats is not wide. Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine and Turkey are classified as countries with relatively low threats. • Bulgaria and Romania have achieved the highest progress in this regard. Both countries primarily face the threats of economic (trade balance) and demographic kind (reduction of population). • Ukraine is not subjected to a large scope of threats, though their range is wider than in case of Bulgaria and Romania (dependency of energy supply, demographic crisis, AIDS, etc.). • In case of Moldova, the economic and demographic threats are enlarged by the problems of territorial integrity. • Turkey is not prone to demographic crisis, but it suffers terrorism, territorial problem, dependency of energy supplies as well as the risk of natural disasters.

13. Index of national threats (cont) • Russia can be classified as the country with relatively high threats. Still it is not comparable with the leaders of the rating, occupying 81 place. • Russian score is closed to the Turkish one (4,34 and 4 correspondingly). • Russia faces the threats of terrorism, territorial integrity, undiversified exports, demographic crisis, excessive migration, risk of natural disasters. • Georgian scope of threats is much wider. It is one of the leaders of the rating (39 place). • These are territorial disputes, separatism and territorial integrity, trade deficit, natural disasters, demographic crisis, water shortage, etc.

14. Index of capacity for international influence: sample rating

15. Index of capacity for international influence: some findings • Russia is among global leaders with 2,60 points, though giving way to USA (10), China (3,93), Japan (3,25), Germany (3,24), France (2,81) and UK (2,65). • Turkey demonstrates substantial result, being # 14 in the rating with 1,14 points. It is among 18 countries of the world which are classified as the ones with relatively high capacity for international influence. • Turkey is a regional leader. Its capabilities are concentrated while the Russian ones are dispersed. • Ukraine is # 29 in the rating. Partly due to the ‘Soviet heritage”. • Romania and Bulgaria are # 48 and 66 correspondingly, having less resources to influence the regional and international affairs. • Georgia and Moldova are on the bottom of the rating, though Georgia has been taking extraordinary measures to increase its military power.

16. Quality of life index: sample rating

17. Quality of life index: some findings • The region is characterized by relatively low quality of life, though the positions in the ratings are not the same. • Bulgaria, Russia and Romania are among the regional leaders, having similar scores and staying close in the rating (2,71; 2,68; 2,62). However, Russia demonstrates specific problems such as high injuries mortality. • Turkey and Ukraine are second best in the region (2,27 and 2,20 points). • Georgia and Moldova demonstrate the poorest results. • However, even the regional outsiders perform better than the 3-rd world countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa.

18. Index of State Consistency: sample rating

19. Index of state consistency: some findings • Russia, Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria are qualified as the countries which have sufficient state consistency. Major factors: long traditions of state sovereignty and economic independence in terms of foreign aid. Though Bulgaria has higher indebtedness, which diminish its score. • Post-soviet countries of the region demonstrate poor performance in the rating. They are more dependent on foreign aid, have higher indebtedness, bear the burden of internal conflicts. • State consistency is correlated with the countries’ capabilities and capacity to influence the international environment.

20. Index of institutional basis of democracy: sample rating

21. Index of institutional basis of democracy: some findings • Most countries of the region have functional institutions of democracy which provide competition and participation. • However, no country belongs to the leaders of the rating, suffering the legacies of the authoritarian past or the autocratic elements of their political regimes. • Romania, Ukraine and Bulgaria are the regional leaders, having similar scores. • Moldova shows positive result, though the institutions of democracy do not seem to provide sufficient state consistency. • Russia and Turkey occupy lower positions, being in the middle of the rating and still being classified as countries which have sufficient institutional basis of democracy. • Finally, Georgia is an outsider. Among the factors are: low electoral competition and recent revolutionary change of power (though under the democratic slogans).

22. An experiment with factor analysis • Searching for the non-correlated principle components • Calculation of countries’ explanation by the principle components • Presentation of indices and countries in the components • Analysis of structures, composed by countries in the components’ space

23. Four principles components: world political projections • “Threats”– vs. –“Quality of life” (“national survival and its quality”) • “Stateness” – vs. –“Democracy” (“state basis of democracy”) • “Stateness” – vs. –“Quality of life” (“human price of stateness”) • “Capacity for international influence” (“maximization of influence”)

24. Countries in the components 1 and 2

25. Countries in the components 1 and 4

26. Black Sea Countries’ Typology

27. Black Sea Countries’ Typology • The countries of the region compose different clusters as revealed by the principle components • Romania and Bulgaria are the countries with close typological features. They enjoy the low level of internal and external threats, maintain average levels of the quality of life. These characteristics represent their key typological features. • Georgia can be found on the opposite pole of the components’ coordinates. It faces severe threats which undermine its quality of life. • Moldova is the country where formal democratic institutions co-exist with critically low level of stateness. • Ukraine also has this misbalance, though it is less severe. It can be regarded as an “intermediate” cluster between Moldova on the one hand and Romania and Bulgaria on the other. • Finally, Russia and Turkey are the countries with the highest capacity for international influence, having strong stateness, though mixed political regimes. They compose the cluster of the regional powers.

28. Prospects • Time series • Diversified typologies • Non-linear analysis of countries’ dynamics