Send message to Authors

Abstract

Large-scale migration of Russian citizens to Kazakhstan in 2022–2023 represents one of the most significant recent cases of a sudden, politically driven mobility in the post-Soviet space. Almaty, as the country’s largest city, became a primary immigration destination, even though a large fraction of it has been transitory.

This paper examines the impact of immigration flows from Russia to regional economy of Almaty city using a simple structural econometric model. We explore the effect of district-level inflows of Russian migrants on various sectors of the city economy at a level of 8 districts of Almaty in 2010-2024, split up to two period: pre-war (2010-2021) and wartime (2022-2024). Sectors of economic activities include professional, scientific, and technical services; management and consulting, information and IT, architectural and engineering, building and office maintenance, creative and cultural industries, advertising, rental, repair, sports and recreation, legal and accounting, real estate, and employment services, all in terms of their monetary values in the respective years. Altogether, our empirical analysis covers a panel of 14 years over 8 districts of Almaty, conducted for twenty urban service sectors. To identify causal effects, we employ a difference-in-differences model, controlling for fixed effects, capital and human resources, and exploit variation in migration flows from Russia before and after the 2022 migration shock. This approach allows us to capture how migration-driven spatial concentration translates into differentiated trajectories of sectoral development across the city districts.

The estimated effects are overall statistically significant, declining effect of migrants for most sectors of the city economy. Specifically, while the overall effect of migrants is positive, returns to scale of Russian migration in pre-war period is mostly negative. This tendency, however, reverses for the war migrants: the difference-in-differences estimator is highly significant and positive for most of the sectors, especially for services. This effect can be attributed to higher average human capital of this wave of migrants, agglomeration effects, and institutional adaptation, especially in such industries as informatics and IT, science and technologies, real estate services and cultural products.

The paper contributes to migration scholarship by offering one of the first quantitative, district-level assessments of post-2022 migration impacts in the CIS context, highlighting how migration reshapes cities through intertwined demographic, economic, and social processes.

Send message to Authors

Abstract

This paper examines the best practices of organized recruitment in contemporary Russia as a system of state-supported and institutionally coordinated mechanisms for attracting, training, and integrating human capital. The study focuses on the transformation of organized recruitment from a narrow labor-matching instrument into a broader policy framework that links employment services, vocational education, digital platforms, and youth talent development. Particular attention is paid to the interaction between labor-market institutions and educational initiatives aimed at reducing information asymmetries, improving school-to-work transitions, and strengthening the quality of workforce preparation.

The paper systematizes several key practices that have emerged in Russia since the 2010s. Among them are the unified digital employment platform Work in Russia, which has expanded the transparency and territorial reach of vacancy matching; the WorldSkills movement and demonstration exams, which have promoted competency-based training and standardized assessment in vocational education; the “Profstazhirovki 2.0” initiative, which connects students with employers through practice-oriented case assignments and internships; the modernization of employment centres into client-oriented career hubs; and educational projects such as Russia – Land of Opportunity, the Boiling Point innovation network, and early career-guidance programmes. Taken together, these instruments illustrate a shift toward an integrated recruitment model based on digitalization, public-private cooperation, and measurable competencies.

Methodologically, the paper relies on a qualitative policy analysis and systematization of institutional practices implemented in the spheres of labor-market regulation, vocational training, and educational mobility. The analysis demonstrates that the combined effect of these measures is reflected in three major outcomes: improved labor-market transparency, stronger alignment between education and employer demand, and the expansion of youth social mobility through institutionalized “social lift” mechanisms. The Russian experience is therefore interpreted not only as a national case of organized recruitment, but also as a transferable policy toolkit for countries facing labor shortages, skills mismatches, and persistent youth out-migration.

Send message to Author

Abstract

This paper investigates a central puzzle in development economics: why sustained GDP growth does not always coincide with productivity-enhancing structural change. Focusing on two major Central Asian economies—Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan—over 2000–2024, we document that both countries experienced steady increases in output per worker, yet followed markedly different structural transformation paths.

To explain this divergence, we combine aggregate growth accounting, sectoral productivity decomposition, and a shift-share structural change framework across agriculture, industry, and services. Using World Bank World Development Indicators, we decompose output growth into contributions from capital, labor, and total factor productivity (TFP), and then isolate the roles of within-sector productivity growth and labor reallocation (static and dynamic effects).

Our empirical strategy allows us to test whether aggregate growth is driven by productivity improvements within sectors or by the movement of labor toward more productive activities. We show that Kazakhstan’s growth was largely TFP-driven—particularly in the early 2000s—consistent with a commodity-led expansion, but accompanied by weak or negative dynamic reallocation. In contrast, Uzbekistan’s growth was more accumulation-led, with stronger contributions from capital deepening and employment growth, and only post-2012 evidence of positive dynamic structural change.

The results demonstrate that high growth alone is neither sufficient nor necessary for productivity-enhancing structural transformation. We contribute to the literature by showing that the composition of growth—rather than its rate—determines whether structural change supports or undermines long-run productivity gains. These findings have important implications for resource-rich and transition economies seeking to translate growth into sustainable development.