Search

This article explores the challenges facing the modern energy market in the context of the accelerated energy transition. It concludes that neither the objectives nor the preparation for the energy transition have been aligned with the actual needs and demands of humanity. The current goals of the energy transition are ideologically driven and unrealistic, prompting countries and companies to reconsider their previously established timelines for achieving carbon neutrality, while investors are growing increasingly disillusioned with the «green» transition. Despite trillions of dollars in investments, alternative energy sources have failed to replace traditional fuels or ensure reliable energy supply. Concurrently, the demand for electricity will continue to rise with the advancement of artificial intelligence and the expansion of data processing centers.The article highlights that in Europe, the emphasis on the «green» energy transition has led to economic downturns, while in developing countries, the implementation of the energy transition has manifested as «green» neocolonialism, characterized by resource extraction. Lobbying for an accelerated energy transition represents one form of market share competition. Another form includes unlawful sanctions and technological restrictions imposed by the United States on several countries, and the use of the dollar as an economic weapon, which has compelled developing nations to embark on dedollarization processes.The article concludes that energy development must be linked to ensuring energy security, combating poverty, and addressing the interests of the majority. Therefore, hydrocarbons will continue to be a critical component of the energy sector.

The article identifies new trends and challenges in the development of the world economy and energy in an era of global instability, including the economic problems of the United States of America, the trend towards dedollarization of the global economy and the transition to alternative payment systems, the deindustrialization of Europe, role of the Government in economy, risks undermining the long-term stability of oil supplies due to underinvestment and limited opportunities to increase new production capacities. The issues of the development of «green» energy are analyzed, while it is shown that hat reducing the causes of global warming solely to CO2 emissions resulting from human activities is not sufficiently substantiated. The possibilities and problems of the fuel and energy sector of Russia in the era of the transformation of the world energy markets and restructuring of Russian’s economy are revealed.

The Eurasian Economic Union States should strengthen their sovereignty within the EAEU through the complementary specialization of economies, cooperative ties in knowledge-intensive industries and economic sectors around the entire economic cycle. However, the Eurasian integration needs a new impetus. The period having passed since the EAEU creation imposed a necessity to qualitatively revise what has been done, to frankly state that a whole range of the Treaty’s provisions was not fulfilled as well as to formulate and propose specific mechanisms for further implementation of its provisions, to outline new integration horizons, to adopt appropriate decisions and to start acting. The article provides an idea of where the Eurasian integration is currently moving. It offers an overview of the Strategic Directions for Developing the Eurasian Economic Integration until 2025, the document that embodies the transition from the shaping stage (2015–2019) to the project integration stage (2020–2025). The new stage’s essence is about ensuring conditions for the specific joint economic projects at both interstate and individual economic entity level. The article mentions what has already been accomplished in this direction and what lies ahead. It reflects the integration’s impact on the participating countries’ economies: both existing and forecast one. Furthermore, it touches upon the issue of dedollarizing the Union countries’ mutual trade, digitalization, the EAEU international cooperation as well as global economic risks and ways to overcome those through integration cooperation. In conclusion, the article proposes new principles of the integration association’s work.

China and Russia aim to increase bilateral trade to 200 billion USD by 2024. In addition to the enormous potential for cooperation in the field of traditional energy and mineral products, agriculture, investment and engineering contracts, as well as scientific and technological cooperation, have developed rapidly. The latter is expected to become a new pillar of Sino-Russian economic and trade cooperation. The subject of this study is the ongoing innovation in the banking sector in the organization of settlements in the yuan between Russia and China. The international system of settlements and payments includes the transfer of financial information and the distribution of assets, it is a key link in global economic cooperation. However, the Sino-Russian system of payments and settlements is severely restricted by the United States. Against the background of abuse of the US financial hegemony and acceleration of internationalization of the yuan, the settlement system between China and Russia faces real demand for dedollarization, which lead to mutual settlements between China and Russia in the national currency, especially the RMB calculations. Based on the analysis of the actual and potential demand for Chinese yuan in the Russian market, the political environment of settlements in yuan and the technical conditions for calculating the amount, the authors concluded that the prospects for the Sino-Russian system of settlements and payments in yuan are high.

Theoretical and practical aspects of the problem of functioning of the world’s means of payment and accumulation are discussed. It is shown that the US dollar is one of the specific forms of world money along with other ‘dominant’ currencies due to its function as a reliable asset for other countries, requiring for the issuing country exceptionally strong national institutions and confidence in this national currency, the American currency is also the universal equivalent in international settlements and the world’s means of payment, accumulation and medium of circulation. It is determined that the Russian ruble is ‘commodity’ currency but not the ‘dominant’ currency, and its share in international settlements is almost imperceptible. It is shown that, other things being equal, the American currency will continue to flow into Russia, since the export of Russian raw materials is traded on the world market mainly in dollars. It was revealed that the strategy for de-dollarization of the Russian economy did not contribute to the displacement of the dollar from payments for exports from Russia, with a noticeable increase in the share of the euro in payments. It was found that the transition in Russia’s settlements from China to national currencies was not carried out, and the EAEU countries remained the only ruble zone in settlements for Russia. It is shown that Russia’s attempt to switch to settlements exclusively in rubles is tantamount to creating an exclusive money circulation system for a small country, which, within the framework of the ‘dominant’ currencies paradigm, shows its limitations. The risks for the Russian economy as a result of its isolation from the system of international settlements in dollars and euros are formulated as part of the current sanctions by developed countries

The new round of anti-Russia sanctions in 2018 once again revealed the risks of the long-term dependence of the Russian economy on the US dollar. The task of dedollarization is gaining new momentum and is being discussed by the highest officials in Russia, backed up by the statements of many foreign partners, trying to avoid the growing economic pressure of the USA

Currency risk, and its effect on public debt, is becoming more important in economic analysis, particularly in highly dollarized countries like Serbia. The aim of this paper is to analyse the currency structure of the public debt in Serbia and the associated risks, and to present the recommendations for improving public debt management based on international experiences. This paper analyses the currency structure of public debt of Serbia over the period 2004-2016, the comparative indicators of dollarization in Serbia and selected countries of the region, as well as the currency risk movements. The currency structure of the public debt of Serbia characterizes the predominance of three currencies - dinar, dollar and euro. Serbia is the most euroised country in the region, along with a marked highest share of dollar debt in total public debt. As a result, due to currency mismatch, the public debt of Serbia is exposed to high currency risk. Based on the presented successful examples of public debt management in Hungary and Poland, as countries with a low level of dollarization, the recommendations for improving public debt management system in Serbia are presented in the final section of our paper.