Steel in Translation

, Volume 47, Issue 1, pp 32–36 | Cite as

Integration of the markets for metal products



The continuing significance of the metallurgical sector in the Russian economy is noted. The structural changes in the consumer market for metal goods are refined, in the light of the continuing demand from the power industry. It is important to take account of the geographic integration of markets in contemplating further industrialization. On the basis of a model proposed by Glushchenko for assessing the integration of the internal consumer market, the interregional integration of markets is analyzed for the example of several submarkets for metal products used in the oil and gas industry and in construction. Market integration is assessed in terms of compliance with the uniform-price law, which proposes a single price for a particular product over several geographically distinct market segments, with no barrier to trade between them. An autoregression model is used to assess the rate of price convergence between regions and also the convergence to the national average. This approach permits comparison of the regional markets for high-tech, high-quality, and regular metal products in terms of geographic integration. The results show relatively weak integration of the regions in all three submarkets. For each one, the structure of integrated relations is different. On the basis of the results, a map of geographic integration of the market for high-tech metal products used in the oil and gas industry is plotted, reflecting the price convergence in the regions in a time-series model. The geographic distance between the market segments has no great influence on the rate of price convergence. It is expedient to consider the geographic integration of the markets in order to assess the indeterminacy when developing a strategy for new industrialization in Russia. In expanding the domestic consumer market for high-tech metal products with high added value, the development of interregional communication tends to reduce competitive risks and creates positive multiplicative and synergetic effects.


market integration autoregression model uniform-price law interregional communication hightech metal products 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Romanova, O.A., Strategic vector of economic dynamics of an industrial region, Ekon. Reg., 2014, no. 1, pp. 43–55.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Romanova, O.A. and Sirotin, D.V., New technological shape of basic branches of RF industrial regions, Econ. Soc. Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 2015, no. 5, pp. 27–43.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    An, E.A. and An, A.E., Spatial integration of science, education and production as a factor in increasing the competitiveness of regional economies, Vestn. Altaisk. Nauki, 2015, nos. 3–4, pp. 88–95.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gadzhiev, Yu.A., Foreign theory of regional economic growth and development, Ekon. Reg., 2009, no. 2, pp. 45–62.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Glushchenko, K.P., The law of one price in the Russian economic space, Prikl. Ekonometr., 2010, no. 1, pp. 3–19.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tsyplakov, A.A., Evaluation of the quality of probabilistic forecasts: correct scoring rules and points, Prikl. Ekonometr., 2012, no. 3, pp. 115–132.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berkowitz, D., DeJong, D.N., and Husted, S., Quantifying price liberalization in Russia, J. Comp. Econ., 1998, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 735–760. doi 10.1006/jcec.1998.1555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gardner, B. and Brooks, K., Food prices and market integration in Russia: 1992–93, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 1994, no. 76, pp. 641–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gluschenko, K., Russia’s common market takes shape: price convergence and market integration among Russian regions, in BOFIT Discussion Paper, Helsinki: Bank of Finland, 2006, no.7.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Koen, V. and De Masi, P., Prices in the Transition: Ten Stylized Facts, IMF Working Paper, Washington, DC: Int. Monetary Fund, 1997, no.158.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Obstfeld, M. and Taylor, A.M., Sovereign risk, credibility and the gold standard: 1870–1913 versus 1925–31, Econ. J., 2003, vol. 113, no. 487, pp. 241–275.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paulo, M.M., Rodrigues Recursive adjustment, unit root tests and structural breaks, J. Time Series Anal., 2013, no. 1, pp. 62–68.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gluschenko, K., Distribution Dynamics of Russian Regional Prices, Ann Arbor, MI: William Davidson Inst., 2013.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goodwin, B.K. and Schroeder, T.C., Co-integration tests and spatial price linkages in regional cattle markets, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 1991, no. 73, pp. 452–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Barmin, V., Infographics: patterns of information flows sharing and volatility spillovers, Rev. Bus. Econ. Stud., 2015, no. 2, pp. 67–68.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haian, N., Exchange rate management in Vietnam for sustaining stable and long-term economic growth, Rev. Bus. Econ. Stud., 2015, no. 2, pp. 58–66.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Allerton Press, Inc. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Economics, Ural BranchRussian Academy of SciencesYekaterinburgRussia

Personalised recommendations