COMPLEMENTARITY OF MINERAL RESOURCE POTENTIAL IN THE RUSSIAN ARCTIC  AND THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST: IMPLICATIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL COOPERATION

Original article

Download article  

Ekaterina A. Bazhutova

Luzin Institute for Economic Studies of the Kola Science Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia, eabazhutova@mail.ru, ORCID 0000-0002-7407-8084

 

Abstract. This article assesses the complementarity of the mineral resource bases of the Russian Arctic and the Russian Far East and examines the potential for integrating these macroregions within the framework of the Spatial Development Strategy of the Russian Federation through 2030, with a forecast to 2036. The aim of the study is to identify opportunities for interregional industrial cooperation that would enable a transition from a raw-material export model to the development of deep-processing value chains. The research methodology is based on a comparative analysis of the two macroregions, both individually and as an integrated system. The theoretical and methodological framework covers four key dimensions: the structural sustainability of the resource base, territorial specialization, the potential for functional cooperation, and the applicability of the findings to spatial governance practices. The empirical basis includes data on the total reserves of 31 types of mineral resources as of January 1, 2024, across 19 regions officially classified as part of the Russian Arctic and the Far Eastern Federal District. The findings indicate that integration of the macroregions enhances the stability of the resource system. The complementarity of the mineral resource potentials of the Russian Arctic and the Far Eastern Federal District is cumulative in nature. Accordingly, the need for cooperation does not decrease with integration but is redistributed within the unified system, creating conditions for economies of scale. This, in turn, underscores the need for active government regulation and coordinated industrial policy. By combining measures of resource concentration and systemic importance for cooperation, the study classifies mineral resources and regions by types of managerial situations and identifies specific mineral resources as “cooperation networks” and regions as “industrialization nodes” that can serve as primary drivers of industrial development. The study substantiates the need to shift toward a macroregional model of natural resource management focused on deep processing, enhanced spatial connectivity, and sustainable resource development. The results contribute to the advancement of theoretical and methodological approaches to assessing mineral resource potential and have practical value as a strategic planning tool for prioritizing government support in the spatial management of mineral resource development.

Keywords: Russian Arctic, Russian Far East, region, macroregion, complementary development, mineral resource potential, interregional industrial cooperation

Acknowledgements: This study was financially supported by the Russian Science Foundation, Grant No. 25-18-20078, https://rscf.ru/project/25-18-20078/.

For citation: Bazhutova E. A. Complementarity of mineral resource potential in the Russian Arctic and the Russian Far East: Implications for industrial cooperation. Sever i rynok: formirovanie ekonomicheskogo poryadka [The North and the Market: Forming the Economic Order], 2026, no. 3, pp. 37–53. doi:10.37614/2220-802X.3.2026.93.003.

References

  1. Agoshkov M. I. Ekonomika mineral’nogo syr’ya [Economics of mineral raw materials]. Moscow, Nedra, 1983, 320 p. (In Russ.).
  2. Khachaturov T. S. Ekonomicheskaya otsenka prirodnykh resursov [Economic evaluation of natural resources]. Moscow, Ekonomika, 1979, 215 p. (In Russ.).
  3. Kotkin V. A., Smirnov A. P. Geologo-ekonomicheskaya otsenka mestorozhdeniy poleznykh iskopaemykh [Geological and economic evaluation of mineral deposits]. Moscow, Nedra, 2001, 256 p. (In Russ.).
  4. Burtseva I. G., Tikhonova T. V., Burtsev I. N. Ekonomicheskaya otsenka mineral’no-syr’evogo potentsiala arkticheskikh territoriy Respubliki Komi [Economic assessment of mineral resource potential of Arctic territories of the Komi Republic]. Arktika: ekologiya i ekonomika [Arctic: Ecology and Economy], 2022, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 87–98. doi:10.25283/2223-4594-2022-1-87-98. (In Russ.).
  5. Eltoshkina N. V., Yundunov Kh. I. Otsenka potentsiala mineral’no-syr’evykh resursov Respubliki Buryatiya [Assessment of mineral resource potential of the Republic of Buryatia]. Moskovskiy ekonomicheskiy zhurnal [Moscow Economic Journal], 2019, no. 6. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/otsenka-potentsiala-mineralno-syrievyh-resursov-respubliki-buryatiya (accessed 31.03.2026). (In Russ.).
  6. Blam I. Yu., Gal’perin M. I. Otsenka mineral’no-syr’evogo potentsiala regiona: metody i praktika [Assessment of mineral resource potential of a region: Methods and practice]. Region: ekonomika i sotsiologiya [Region: Economics and Sociology], 2015, no. 3, pp. 45–62. (In Russ.).
  7. Runganga D., Ashworth P., Bharadwaj B. Why we need more criticality experts from mineral-producing countries. Mineral Economics, 2026, vol. 39, pp. 207–230. doi:10.1007/s13563-025-00550-6.
  8. Frenzel M., Kullik J., Reuter M., Gutzmer J. Raw material “criticality”: Sense or nonsense? Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 2017, vol. 50, 18 p. doi:10.1088/1361-6463/aa5b64.
  9. Gleich B., Achzet B., Mayer H., Rathgeber A. An empirical approach to determine specific weights of driving factors for the price of commodities—a contribution to the measurement of the economic scarcity of minerals and metals. Resources Policy, 2013, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 350–362. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2013.03.011.
  10. Erdmann L., Graedel T. E. Criticality of non-fuel minerals: A review of major approaches and analyses. Environmental Science & Technology, 2011, vol. 45, no. 18, pp. 7620–7630.
  11. Achzet B., Helbig C. How to evaluate raw material supply risks—an overview. Resources Policy, 2013, vol. 38, no. 4, 435–447.
  12. Hatayama H., Tahara K. Adopting an objective approach to criticality assessment: Learning from the past. Resources Policy, 2018, vol. 55, pp. 96–102.
  13. Graedel T. E., Barr R., Chandler C., Chase T., Choi J., Christoffersen L. et al. Methodology of metal criticality determination. Environmental Science & Technology, 2012, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 1063–1070. doi:10.1021/es203534z.
  14. Schrijvers D., Hool A., Blengini G. A., Chen W.-Q., Dewulf J., Eggert R. et al. A review of methods and data to determine raw material criticality. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2020, vol. 155, Art. 104617.
  15. Helbig C., Bruckler M., Thorenz A., Tuma A. An overview of indicator choice and normalization in raw material supply risk assessments. Resources, 2021, vol. 10, no. 8, Art. 79.
  16. Sokolov S. N. Otsenka mineral’no-syr’evykh resursov regionov Yugry [Assessment of mineral resources of Yugra regions]. Kul’tura, nauka, obrazovanie: problemy i perspektivy [Culture, Science, Education: Problems and Prospects], 2021, vol. 1, 562–569. doi:10.36906/KSP-2021/81. (In Russ.).
  17. Tian Y., Chen M. et al. Research on the impact of digital economy development on mineral resource utilization efficiency. Frontiers in Earth Science, 2025, vol. 12. doi:10.3389/feart.2024.1496438.
  18. Enhancing regional mining ecosystems in the European Union: Securing the green transition and supply of mineral raw materials, Paris, OECD Publishing, 2025, 203 p. doi:10.1787/97ba1224-en.
  19. Bucciarelli P., Hache E., Mignon V. Evaluating criticality of strategic metals: Are the Herfindahl–Hirschman index and usual concentration thresholds still relevant? Energy Economics, 2025, vol. 143, art. 108208. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108208.
  20. Auty R. M. Sustaining development in minerals economics: The resource curse thesis, London, Routledge, 1993, 288 p. doi:10.4324/9780203422595.
  21. Corden W. M., Neary J.P. Booming sector and de-industrialisation in a small open economy. Economic Journal, 1982, 92, no. 368, pp. 825–848. doi:10.2307/2232670.
  22. von Berg M. Why is it often said that natural resources are a curse? Essex Student Journal, 2012, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–14, doi:10.5526/esj94.
  23. Tkachenko G. G. Strukturnye izmeneniya mineral’no-resursnogo potentsiala arkticheskoy zony Dal’nego Vostoka [Structural changes in mineral resource potential of the Arctic zone of the Far East]. Geosistemy Severo-Vostochnoy Azii [Geosystems of Northeast Asia], Vladivostok, Pacific Geographical Institute FEB RAS, 2022, pp. 194–200. doi:10.35735/9785604701171_194. (In Russ.).
  24. Zhang X., Li Y. et al. Spatio-temporal heterogeneity and coupling effect of mining economy. PLOS ONE, 2024, vol. 19, 3, e0301585. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0301585.
  25. Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy, 1991, vol. 99, pp. 483–499.
  26. Mints A. A. Estestvennye resursy kak faktor formirovaniya territorial’no-proizvodstvennykh kompleksov [Natural resources as a factor in the formation of territorial production complexes]. Voprosy geografii [Issues of Geography], 1970, no. 80, 89–102. (In Russ.).
  27. Leontief W. Input-output economics. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1986, 394 p.
  28. Stilwell L. C., Minnitt R. C. A., Monson T. D. The mining industry in the European Union: Analysis of inter-industry linkages using input–output analysis. Resources Policy, 2006, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2006.03.004.
  29. Porter M. E. Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 1998, vol. 76, no. 6, pp. 77–90.
  30. Cherepovitsyn A. E., Lipina S. A., Evseeva O. O. Innovatsionnyi podkhod k osvoeniyu mineral’no-syr’evogo potentsiala Arkticheskoi zony RF [Innovative approach to the development of mineral raw materials of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation]. Zapiski Gornogo instituta [Journal of Mining Institute], 2018, vol. 232, pp. 438–444. doi:10.31897/PMI.2018.4.438. (In Russ.).
  31. Tkachenko G. G. Geograficheskie faktory integratsii rossiyskogo Dal’nego Vostoka so stranami Severo-Vostochnoi Azii [Geographical factors of integration of the Russian Far East with Northeast Asia countries]. Irkutsk, 2011, 24 p. (In Russ.).
  32. Galazova S. S., Karaev T. M., Tagaev D. A. Komplementarnost’ regional’nykh resursov: ponyatie, vidy, klassifikatsiya [Complementarity of regional resources: Concept, types, classification]. Vestnik NGUEU [Bulletin of NSUEM], 2025, no. 2, 118–131. doi:10.34020/2073-6495-2025-2-118-131. (In Russ.).
  33. Kutsenko E., Tripathi S., Tyurchev K. Does complementarity matter for the emergence of new specialization industries in the regions of Russia? Regional Science Policy & Practice, 2023, vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 2126–2155. doi:10.1111/rsp3.12668.
  34. Assimmetrii regionalnykh integratsionnykh proektov XXI veka [Asymmetries of regional integration projects of the 21st century]. Moscow, Izdatelstvo Ural Federal University, 2018, 312 p. (In Russ.).
  35. Foray D. The economic fundamentals of smart specialization strategies. Advances in the Theory and Practice of Smart Specialization. London, Academic Press, 2017, pp. 38–50.
  36. Kryukov V. A., Seliverstov V. E. From the continental and resource curse of Siberia to institutional harmony. Regional Research of Russia [Regional Research of Russia], 2021, vol. 11, suppl. 1, pp. 1–12.