The Russian exported goods under the umbrella brand: Expectations and reality

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. 1636-1655
Author(s):  
M.B. Medvedeva ◽  
E.B. Starodubtseva
Keyword(s):  
Dynamic Analysis ◽  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Special Function ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Foreign Market ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
Crucial Issue ◽  
Classification Tool ◽  
Made In

Subject. The restructuring of the Russian exports is a crucial issue of the foreign trade policy. Considering sanctions against Russia, exports can be reshaped with non-trivial methods. The Russian goods can be successfully offered to the foreign market if an umbrella brand Made in Russia is used. Objectives. The study determines difficulties and opportunities of promoting the Russian goods to the foreign market under the umbrella brand Made in Russia. Methods. The study relies upon general and special methods of research, such as retrospective, systems and functional structure analyses, observation, classification, tool-based techniques for grouping, sampling, comparison and summary, evolutionary and dynamic analysis. Results. The umbrella brand Made in Russia was proved to primarily include goods with the international recognition and gradually embrace promising and competitive goods, but not yet well known abroad. The article points out risks of the strategy as the umbrella brand may absorb some toxic regional goods or brands, which offer poor quality goods. Conclusions. To mitigate basic risks, it is necessary to draw upon the expertise of the Russian local brands and grow a commodity brand. There should be a special infrastructure to support national exporters, including the Russian export center, which should include a special function of foreign trade intermediaries. The foreign trade intermediaries are supposed to practically help national exporters, but also provide training programs for raising the foreign trade knowledge of businesses.

scholarly journals A study on growing Indian Economy in relation to the International Foreign trade

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 114-118
Author(s):  
Dr Sumanta Bhattacharya ◽  
Bhavneet Kaur Sachdev
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Gdp Growth ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
Sustainable Living ◽  
Defence Sector ◽  
Small Scale Industries ◽  
Made In

India is transforming its economy, there is infrastructure development, introduction of technology into majority of the sector. India is adopting smart technology and smart sustainable living to become self sufficient with the aim to reduce imports and promote exports in foreign trade. The country has allowed 100% FDI in a number of sectors. India is becoming an manufacturing hub with the made in India scheme being implemented in every sector from agricultural to Industrial to Service Sector.Foreign trade promotes diplomatic relation between countries. India is the largest producer of many products in the world, the defence sector has also started their own manufacturing in India, the sector has exported many missile and aircrafts adding to the GDP growth. Made in India scheme has provided employment to the young youth and many other skilled and unskilled people..The 2021 to 2026 foreign trade policy focus on small scale industries -MSME who are contributing 40% to the GDP growth and provided employment to maximum number of people after agricultural sector.

scholarly journals Foreign Trade Policy from the Revolution to World War I

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc-William Palen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War I ◽  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Foreign Market ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
World War ◽  
Foreign Markets ◽  
American System

Economic nationalism tended to dominate U.S. foreign trade policy throughout the long 19th century, from the end of the American Revolution to the beginning of World War I, owing to a pervasive American sense of economic and geopolitical insecurity and American fear of hostile powers, especially the British but also the French and Spanish and even the Barbary States. Following the U.S. Civil War, leading U.S. protectionist politicians sought to curtail European trade policies and to create a U.S.-dominated customs union in the Western Hemisphere. American proponents of trade liberalization increasingly found themselves outnumbered in the halls of Congress, as the “American System” of economic nationalism grew in popularity alongside the perceived need for foreign markets. Protectionist advocates in the United States viewed the American System as a panacea that not only promised to provide the federal government with revenue but also to artificially insulate American infant industries from undue foreign-market competition through high protective tariffs and subsidies, and to retaliate against real and perceived threats to U.S. trade. Throughout this period, the United States itself underwent a great struggle over foreign trade policy. By the late 19th century, the era’s boom-and-bust global economic system led to a growing perception that the United States needed more access to foreign markets as an outlet for the country’s surplus goods and capital. But whether the United States would obtain foreign market access through free trade or through protectionism led to a great debate over the proper course of U.S. foreign trade policy. By the time that the United States acquired a colonial empire from the Spanish in 1898, this same debate over U.S. foreign trade policy had effectively merged into debates over the course of U.S. imperial expansion. The country’s more expansionist-minded economic nationalists came out on top. The overwhelming 1896 victory of William McKinley—the Republican party’s “Napoleon of Protection”—marked the beginning of substantial expansion of U.S. foreign trade through a mixture of protectionism and imperialism in the years leading up to World War I.

D. I. Mendeleev’s “cherished thoughts” on foreign trade and “proper protectionism”

2020 ◽  
pp. 120-139
Author(s):  
T. N. Belova
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Industrial Economy ◽  
The North ◽  
Russian Economy ◽  
American Scholar ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Competition Growth

Foreign trade policy and its role in the economic growth of the national economy are considered through the prism of history and comparison of the formation of the industrial economy in the Russian Empire and the North American United States. The author compares the protectionism of D. I. Mendeleev, described in his economic works, and the free trade thinking of the American scholar W. Sumner, who formulated the “misconceptions” of protectionism. Mendeleev’s proper protectionism is grounded on the basic principles (incentivizing internal competition, growth of consumption, bringing up of new industries ), which are relevant for contemporary Russia. The author gives a typical example of the formation and decline of the factory industry using the case of mirror factories in the Ryazan province. These historical analogies, the paper argues, are necessary for the correct assessment of the current situation and for coming up with valid solutions aimed at the development of the Russian economy.

Free Trade versus Protection : Static and Dynamic Aspects

1985 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-50
Author(s):  
Gunnar Flфystad
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Optimal Taxation ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
Taxation Policy

This paper analyses whether the developing countries are pursuing an optimal foreign trade policy, given the theoretical and empirical evidence we have. The paper concludes that constraints in imposing other taxes than tariffs in many developing countries may justify having tariffs as part of an optimal taxation policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document