Cross-border relations of neighboring states in the context of the development of border territories: theoretical aspect (on the example of Kazakhstan and China)

The purpose of the article is to justify the implementation of new forms of cross-border cooperation in the context of deepening the regional interaction of neighboring states, while deepening the regional interaction of neighboring states.

The objectives of the study were to substantiate the main approaches to identify new forms of cross-border cooperation. It was found that the growing dynamics of world processes gives rise to new forms of interaction both on the basis of multilateral and bilateral cooperation. At the same time, new initiatives are being put forward in the format of cross-border relations. A special role in this case is played by border territories where it is possible to form “local” growth points based on the implementation of joint infrastructure trade and investment projects in the context of deepening regional cooperation between neighboring states.

The implementation of international infrastructure projects is one of the important tasks of the country and is associated with the state program of the Republic of Kazakhstan “Nurly Zhol” and the People’s Republic of China “One Belt, One Way” initiative in the context of increased cross-border interaction.

1. OECD. (2009). Trans-border urban co- operation in the Pan Yellow Sea region. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/urban-rural-and-regional-development/oecd-territorial-reviews-transborder-urban-co-operation-in-the-pan-yellow-searegion-2009_9789264076129-en

2. Limonov L.E. (2012). Analiz torgovo- proizvodstvennyh svyazej prigranichnyh regionov Rossii i Kazahstana: vliyanie Tamozhennogo soyuza i Edinogo ekonomicheskogo prostranstva: otchet o nauchnoissledovatelskoj rabote. Evrazijskij Bank razvitiya. 173.

3. Ilin M.V. (1995). Ocherki hronopoliticheskoj tipologii. Problemy i vozmozhnosti tipologicheskogo analiza evolyucionnyh form politicheskih sistem. M.: MGIMO (U) MID Rossii. ch.1. 112.

4. Shinkovskij M. Yu. (2004). Transgranichnoe sotrudnichestvo kak rychag razvitiya rossijskogo Dalnego Vostoka // Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya. 5, 62-70. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2004.05.07.

5. Oficialnyj sajt Zakonodatelnogo Sobraniya Respubliki Kareliya. Retrieved from www.karelia-zs.ru

6. Hakli J. (2019). Cross-border identities in the new Europe: Chost of the past or sign-post to the next millennium. Retrieved from http://www.may.ie/staff/dpringle/ igu/hakli. pdf

7. Kaledin N.V.& Korneevec V. S. (2007). Transgranichnoe regione — k mezhdunarodnoj sotrudnichestvo v Baltijskom novym prostranstvennym formam ekonomicheskoj integracii. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Ser. 7. 3, 79—89.

8. Gabbe J. (1995). Moglichkeiten und Schwierigkeiten von Euroregionen in Europa, in Hans Bockler Stiftung (Hrsg.). Euroregionen — Chancen und Grenzen. (pp. 54-84). Bochum: Hans Bockler Stiftung,.

9. Corey M. Johnson. (2009). Cross-Border Regions and Territorial Restructuring in Central Europe: Room for More transboundary Space // European Urban and Regional Studies. 16. 177—191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776409102190

10. Lubin, M. (1993). The Routinization of Cross-Border Interactions: An Overview of NEG/ ECP Structures and Activities. In: Broun, D., Earl, H. (eds.). States and Provinces in the International Economy.145-166

11. Dunning, JH. (2000). Regions, globalization, and the knowledge economy: The issues stated. In Regions, globalization, and the knowledge-based economy. 7–41. DOI:10.1093/0199250014.001.0001

12. Rodemann, Margit. (1997). Strategien grenzubergreifender Kooperation imdeutsch-polnischen Grenzraum — Der Netzwerkansatz: Arbeitspapiere des Fachgebiets Soziologische Grundlagen der Raumplanung der Fakultat Raumplanung.

13. Scott, James W. (1996). Dutch-German Euroregions: a model for transboundary co-operation? / In: James W. Scott et al. (eds.). Border Regions in Functional Transition: European and North American Perspectives (pp. 83-106). Erkner: IRS.

14. Charles, D. (2003) Universities and territorial development: Reshaping the regional role of UK universities. Local Economy 18. 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269094032000073780

15. Mezhevich N.A., & Bolotov D.N. Modeli prigranichnogo sotrudnichestva v Rossii: opyt issledovanij municipalnyh obrazovanij Pskovskoj oblasti. Retrieved from http://www.ecoline.ru

16. Busygina I. M. (2004). Rossijskie regiony v mezhdunarodnom sotrudnichestve. Sovremennye mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya i mirovaya politika (pp. 963-986). MGIMO (U) MID Rossii. M.: Prosveshenie.

17. Kuzmin V. M. (2006) Formirovanie socialnoj tolerantnosti u molodezhi sopredelnyh regionov Rossii i ES v formate Evroregionov Baltijskogo morya (na primere Kaliningradskoj oblasti). Bolshaya Vosmerka v globaliziruyushemsya mire: novye podhody v nauke i obrazovanii. SPb.: Asterion.

18. Tyujr K. (2004). Bazovye ponyatiya transgranichnogo sotrudnichestva. Spravochnik po transgranichnomu sotrudnichestvu. Tallin: Velvet. 94

19. Mezhevich N. M. (2005). Spravochnik po prigranichnomu sotrudnichestvu. SPb: Izdatelstvo SZAGS. 420.

20. Razvitie ekonomiki Ukrainy za proshedshie s momenta obreteniya nezavisimosti gody mozhno oharakterizovat sinusoidalnym ciklom razvitiya. Retrieved from http://helpiks.org/5-5418.html

21. Oficialnyj sajt Soveta Evropy. Retrieved https://www.coe.int/ru/web/conventions/fullfromlist/-/conventions/treaty/106

22. Kazahstan i Rossiya budut razvivat prigranichnoe sotrudnichestvo. Retrieved from https://vlast.kz/novosti/32525-kazahstan-i-rossia-budutrazvivat-prigranicnoe-sotrudnicestvo.html

23. Isachenko T.M. (2010). Torgovaya politika Evropejskogo Soyuza. M.: Izdatelskij dom Gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Vysshej shkoly ekonomiki. 395.