This study critically examines the implications of international transport corridor projects for Central Asian countries, focusing on the Western-backed Transport Corridor Europe-Caucasus-Asia (TRACECA), the Chinese initiative “One Belt—One Road”, and the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) supported by the Russian Federation, India, and Iran. The analysis underscores the risks associated with Western projects, highlighting a need for a more explicit commitment to substantial infrastructure investments and persistent contradictions among key investors and beneficiaries. While the Chinese initiative presents significant benefits such as transit participation, infrastructure development, and economic investments, it also carries risks, notably an increased debt burden and potential monopolization by Chinese corporations. The study emphasizes that Central Asian countries, though indirect beneficiaries of INSTC, may not be directly involved due to geographical constraints. Study findings advocate for Central Asian nations to balance foreign investments, promote economic integration, and safeguard political and economic sovereignty. The study underscores the region’s wealth of natural and human resources, emphasizing the potential for increased demand for goods and services with improved living standards, strategically positioning these countries in the evolving global economic landscape.

The People's Republic of China (PRC) wants to become a key regional actor in the Arctic. PRC's underlying priority in the region is gaining access to commercial opportunities from trade and natural resources. To this end, PRC is building its domestic capacities for research and commercial development in the Arctic, increasing its involvement in multilateral forums on Arctic governance and deepening ties to Arctic nations, especially Russia.

Attitudes towards PRC among Arctic nations are diverging, but Beijing generally faces high levels of skepticism and opposition to its Arctic involvement, explicitly grounded in perceptions of PRC as a state undermining the rules-based international order and potential military build-up in the high north.

The analytical framework in this article builds on an outline authored by Exner-Pirot in 2012 (Exner-Pirot, 2012) to detail the current schools of thought within Arctic governance, and builds on it by including more recent developments in Arctic governance, incorporating the updated Arctic policies of most Arctic countries and connecting it to PRC.

This article contends that Beijing wants to change the status quo of Arctic governance and shift it towards a more accommodating approach to non-Arctic states. This article finds, based on the stated Arctic strategies of the eight Arctic states and PRC, that there are different views on Arctic governance where Arctic countries for the most part indicate an openness to a Chinese entry into the Arctic, albeit in diverging ways. This creates a complex governance scenario for PRC to navigate as it seeks to become a key Arctic player

India has experienced notable advancements in trade liberalization, innovation tactics, urbanization, financial expansion, and sophisticated economic development. Researchers are focusing more on how much energy consumption of both renewable and non-renewable accounts for overall system energy consumption in light of these dynamics. In order to gain an understanding of this important and contentious issue, we aim to examine the impact of trade openness, inventions, urbanization, financial expansion, economic development, and carbon emissions affected the usage of renewable and non-renewable energy (REU and N-REU) in India between 1980 and 2020. We apply the econometric approach involving unit root tests, FE-OLS, D-OLS, and FM-OLS, and a new Quantile Regression approach (QR). The empirical results demonstrate that trade openness, urbanization and CO₂ emissions are statistically significant and negatively linked with renewable energy utilization. In contrast, technological innovations, financial development, and economic development in India have become a source of increase in renewable energy utilization. Technological innovations were considered negatively and statistically significant in connection with non-renewable energy utilization, whereas the trade, urbanization, financial growth, economic growth, and carbon emissions have been established that positively and statistically significant influence non-renewable energy utilization. The empirical results of this study offer some policy recommendations. For instance, as financial markets are the primary drivers of economic growth and the renewable energy sector in India, they should be supported in order to reduce CO₂ emissions.

Cross-border infrastructure projects offer significant economic and social benefits for the Asia-Pacific region. If the required investment of $8 trillion in pan-Asian connectivity was made in the region’s infrastructure during 2010–2020, the total net income gains for developing Asia could reach about $12.98 trillion (in 2008 US dollars) during 2010–2020 and beyond, of which more than $4.43 trillion would be gained during 2010–2020 and nearly $8.55 trillion after 2020. Indeed, infrastructure connectivity helps improve regional productivity and competitiveness by facilitating the movement of goods, services and human resources, producing economies of scale, promoting trade and foreign direct investments, creating new business opportunities, stimulating inclusive industrialization and narrowing development gaps between communities, countries or sub-regions. Unfortunately, due to limited financing, progress in the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region is low.

This paper examines the key challenges faced in financing cross-border projects and discusses the roles that different stakeholders—national governments, state-owned enterprises, private sector, regional entities, development financing institutions (DFIs), affected people and civil society organizations—can play in facilitating the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region. In particular, this paper highlights the major risks that deter private sector investments and FDIs and provides recommendations to address these risks.

This paper focuses on studying the impact of institutional distance between home and host countries on the entry mode choice of multinational enterprises (MNEs). Based on theories of transaction costs and institutional theory, we predict the trend of choosing investment forms of wholly-owned enterprises (WOEs) and joint venture enterprises (JVEs) in the agricultural sector of Vietnam in the context of free trade agreement implementation. The data of 364 MNEs from 22 different nations that directly invested in the agricultural sector of Vietnam in the period 1996–2019 were extracted from Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), which is provided by World Bank. An empirical investigation has employed logistic regression. The results show a positive relationship between institutional distance with regard to rule of law and regulatory quality and WOE choice. Furthermore, the entry mode choices of MNEs in Vietnam’s agricultural sector are also noticeably influenced by the implementation of freedom trade agreements (FTAs).

Using a newly-developed data set for Portugal, we analyze the industry-level effects of infrastructure investment. Focusing on the divide between traded and non-traded industries, we find that infrastructure investments have a non-traded bias, as these shift the industry mix towards private and public services. We also find that the industries that benefit the most in relative terms are all non-traded: construction, trade, and real estate, among the private services, and education and health, among the public services. Similarly, emerging trading sectors, such as hospitality and professional services, stand to gain. The positive impacts on traded industries are too small to make a difference. These results highlight that infrastructure-based strategies are not neutral in terms of the industry mix. Moreover, with most of the benefits accruing to non-traded industries, such a development model that is heavily based on domestic demand may be unsustainable in light of Portugal’s current foreign account position.