Journal number 1 ∘ Avtandil Silagadze ∘
Comparative Analysis of Some Economic Indicators of Post-Soviet Countries in the South Caucasus

The paper deals with the comparative analysis of some economic indicators of the post-Soviet countries of South Caucasus, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. According to the conclusions obtained from the survey: First, in 1990, the volume of GDP per capita was the Azerbaijan, which did not greatly surpass Georgia, the Armenian data was more modest. In 2017 Azerbaijan increased this index to ten times, Georgia doubled it, and Armenia was able to make it even better to five times; Secondly, the rate of growth of economic development of countries is radically different. The average annual growth rate of economic growth was 35% in Azerbaijan in 2008, following sharp decline in energy resources and low economic reforms.The economic growth rates of Armenia were reflected in two-digit figures, which was greatly influenced by the CIS, including Russia's economic ties. Low, not efficient growth rates are observed in Georgia, where the scale of the economy has decreased by almost 45% - in 1994, the maximum growth was recorded in 1996 - 11.2% and 2007 - 12.3%;  Third, the per capita GDP was lower in all three countries in the world (10715 $, 2017). Georgia was in the first place with the indicator of 1990 year. In 2014, Azerbaijan has overtaken him twice in 2014. In 2017, the number of GDPs in Azerbaijan decreased by 2 times in 2010 compared to 2014. This figure was maximum: in 2014 in Azerbaijan - $ 7891, in Armenia in 2008 - 4010 in 2014 and in 2014 - 4430 $. Azerbaijan's population grew at a rate of 33.0% per capita in 2006, the highest drop - in -23.8% in 1992. Similar figures in Armenia were the following: 14.7% (2003) and -13.6 (2009). Thus, the world economic crisis touched the most severe (2009) in Armenia and Georgia; The fourth, the different picture was identified according to the purchasing capacity based on  GDP: In 2017, compared to 1990, indicators of Azerbaijan and Georgia have less increased than in Armenia. One of the reasons for this is likely to be a relatively low increase in prices; The fifth, GDP per capita, according to PPP (current international $) Georgia and Armenia are significalty behind the world average indicator (16941 $), indicator of Azerbaijan (17400 $) is higher than that; Sixth, the post-Soviet economy is characterized by a significant increase in direct foreign investments in energy-rich countries, for example in Azerbaijan. This country dominates not only by attracting direct foreign investment but also becoming an active exporting country (including Georgia). Attracting more foreign direct investment is not always a higher share (%) of the country's WTO - it was revealed that this indicator is higher in Georgia in 2013-2017; The seventh, in transition countries, the low income of the population is low due to high inflation. In 2016-2017 Due to the high inflation in Azerbaijan, consumer prices have increased in comparison to Armenia and Georgia; The eighth, economic development stimulates creation of new jobs and reduces outflow of the country’s work-force. It is not accidental that unemployment rate in Azerbaijan is within the EU average, which is down 11.6% in Georgia and in Armenia it exceeds 18%; The ninth, migration is high in Armenia and Georgia. According to the net migration, Georgia and Armenia look unfavorable, which we can not say about Azerbaijan.Based on the World Bank data, calculations show that in Azerbaijan in 2017, the population was 138%, in Armenia 82.8% and in Georgia 77.4%.

Keywords: Economic Indicators; GDP; per capita; PPP.

JEL Codes: P50, P51, P52

          In the early 90th of the last century, after the collapse of the former Soviet Union, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia became independent states. They have joined the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) at different times and have maintained some of the traditional ties established in the USSR, which should promote the development of the economies of these countries. [1-7]. The reliability of maintaining these relationships has been challenged because of the violation of territorial integrity in Azerbaijan and Georgia. These events have changed the vectors of the countries. Georgia has emerged from the CIS membership and has taken the course to join the EU. For obvious reasons, Armenia will lose influence over Nagorno-Karabakh without close relations with Russia and remains in the CIS; Azerbaijan is still trying to use CIS levers and seek alternative ways to restore territorial integrity. Unfortunately, Russia has "lion's contribution" in these conflicts, which seeks to keep the influence of former Soviet republics by such means. These factors greatly define the extent of economic development of the countries. Instead of the realization of favorable geo-political factors - the creation of financial centers and the expansion of the common transport area, the conflicts have compounded the development prospects of the countries. It is not accidental that the market economy in these countries is paced differently. [1; 11; 14-15; 20;22]. Comparative analysis of some economic indicators of three countries is made in the work. (Table 1).

   Table 1.   GDP in the South Caucasus Post-Soviet Countries (current US$), Billion 

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	7.8	4.0	12.8	10.8	12.0	14.4	15.9	16.1	16.5	14.0	14.4	15.2
Azerbaijan	8.9	7.3	48.9	44.3	52.9	66.0	70.0	74.2	75.3	53.1	37.9	80.7
Armenia	2.3	2.8	11.7	8.7	9.3	10.1	10.6	11.1	11.6	10.6	10.6	10.5

Drawn up: worldbank.org/indicator     11.01.2019.

      In 1990, Azerbaijan was leading in accordance with the volume of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) [8] Georgia was not far behind, both of which were significantly higher than the similar figure of Armenia. Azerbaijan increase this indicator almost ten times in 2017, and Georgia doubled and Armenia increased almost five times. Unfortunately, the scale of the growth of Georgia's economy in this period is not insufficient [20]. The rate of growth of economic development of countries is radically different. (Table 2).

Table 2.  GDP growth (annual %)

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	-44.9	11.1	2.3	-3.7	6.3	7. 2	6.4	3.4	4.6	2.9	2.9	5.0
Azerbaijan	-0.7	11.2	10.8 34.5	9.4	4.9	0.1	2.2	5.8	2.0	1.1	-3.1	0.1
Armenia	13.2	12.7	22.0	18.9	19.3	20.2	21.7	22.4	23.2	23.9	24.0	25.8

Drawn up: worldbank.org/indicator      11.01.2019.

The average annual growth rate of economic growth was 35% in Azerbaijan in 2008, which has been sharply reduced due to the realization of energy resources and low economic reforms. The economic growth rates of Armenia were reflected in two-digit numbers, that was affected by economic ties with the CIS, including Russia. Inadequate growth rates were observed in Georgia - where the scale of the economy fell to 45% in 1994, the maximum increase was -11.2% in 1996 and 12.3% in 2007. [23].

      The overall per capita product (GDP) in all three countries is lower than Ïfficial world analog indicator (10715 $, 2017) (Table 3).

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	1615	928	3175	2707	2965	3725	4143	4275	4430	3765	3865	4078
Azerbaijan	1237	884	5575	4950	5843	7190	7496	7876	7891	5500	3881	4132
Armenia	638	630	4010	2994	3218	3527	3685	3844	3994	3618	3606	3937

Drawn up: worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.DEFL.KD.ZG?locations=GE&year_low_desc=false    11.01.2019.

              It should be noted that Georgia was in the first place in 1990 and in 2014 the above mentioned indictor for Azerbaijan was almost 2 times bigger. It should be noted that in 2017, with a decrease in the rate of growth, the GDP per capita was almost 2 times decreased in comparison with 2014.. In total, the total population of GDP per capita was $ 7891 in Azerbaijan in 2014, in Armenia $ 4010 in 2008 and in Georgia $ 4430 in 2014. The average annual GDP growth per capita (%) is given in the table 4.

         Table 4. GDP per capita Growth (annual %)

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	-14.8	12.5	3.6	-2.4	7.7	8.3	7.7	4.7	6.0	3.2	2.8	5.1
Azerbaijan	-	10.4	8.5	7.2	3.6	-1.2	0.9	4.5	0.8	-0.1	-4.2	-1.0
Armenia	-	14.7	7.8	-13.6	2.6	4.8	7.0	2.9	3.2	2.8	-0.1	7.3

Drawn up: worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZG?year_low_desc=fals  11.01.2018.

     GDP per capita growth (annual %) in Georgia was noted in 1996 -14.04%, minimal rate  - 45.3%  in 1992; Azerbaijan's GDP growth rate rose to 33.0% in 2006, the highest drop - 23.8% in 1992, Similar rates in Armenia were the following:14.7% (2003) და -13.6 (2009). 

         Thus, the World Economic Crisis touched (2009) Armenia and Georgia  and in Azerbaijan positive index was noted in this period.

        What kind of dynamics is characterized by GDP purchasing capacity (PPP) in countries analysis? (Table 5).

Table 5.   GDP, PPP (current international $)

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	24.9	14.9	24.8	24.1	25.9	28.4	30.7	32.3	34.4	35.7	37.2	39.8
Azerbaijan	39.4	40.7	120.9	133.3	141.5	144.5	150.4	161.7	167.9	171.6	168.4	171.6
Armenia	8.6	10.7	21.1	18.3	18.9	20.2	22.1	23.1	34.4	25.5	25.8	27.3

Drawn up: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator    11.01.2019.

        We have received a somewhat different picture: In comparison with the year 2017, the Azerbaijan and Georgia figures have grown less than Armenia. One of the reasons for this is the relatively low growth in Armenia. One of the reasons for this is the relatively low growth of prices in Armenia.

       Depending on the above mentioned, GDP per capita in accordance with PPP (in the current international $) has increased by approximately 2 times in Georgia, 3 times in Azerbaijan and 4 times in Armenia. (Table 6).

     Table 6. GDP per capita, PPP (current international $)

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	5.2	3.5	6.2	6.1	6.6	7.3	8.0	8.5	9.2	9.6	10.0	10.7
Azerbaijan	5.5	5.0	13.8	14.9	15.6	15.8	16.2	17.2	17.6	17.9	17.3	17.4
Armenia	2.4	3.5	7.3	6.3	6.6	7.0	7.7	8.0	8.4	8.7	8.8	9.7

Drawn uphttps://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.   11.01.2019.

    Conclusion: GDP per capita, PPP (current international, 16 941 $) - relatively less lagging in Georgia and Armenia, Azerbaijan has a higher rate ($ 17400).

     Decreased in Georgia (which is negative) has increased almost three times in Azerbaijan and twice in Armenia, which is a positive indicator for these countries. (Table 7).

Table 7.  GDP, PPP (constant 2011 international $)

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	38.5	17.7	25.8	24.9	26.4	28.4	30.2	31.2	32.6	35.6	34.5	36.2
Azerbaijan	61.0	48.5	125.9	137.7	144.4	144.5	147.7	156.3	159.4	161.1	168.4	156.3
Armenia	13.2	12.7	22.0	18.9	19.3	20.2	21.7	22.4	23.2	23.9	24.0	25.8

Drwn up: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator   11.01.2019.

  Conclusion: In 1990 Georgia was the leader in this indicator, but in 2017 it was significantly behind Azerbaijan.

 Table 8.  GDP per capita, PPP (constant 2011 international $)

Year	1990	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	8.05	4.1	6.4	6.3	6.7	7.3	7.9	8.3	8.8	9.0	9.3	9.8
Azerbaijan	8.5	5.9	14.4	15.4	16.0	15.8	15.9	16.6	16.7	16.7	16.0	15.9
Armenia	3.7	4.2	7.6	6.5	6.7	7.0	7.5	7.7	7.8	8.2	8.2	8.8

Drawn up: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=AZ   11.01.2019.

         In 2017, Azerbaijan's indicator (15900 $) exceeds the world's average indicator (15469 $), but indexes of Georgia (9800 $) and Armenia (8800 $) sharply went beyond (in 1990 the data of Azerbaijan and Georgia were almost equal).

         The post-Soviet economy is characterized by a significant increase in foreign investments in energy-rich countries [12-13; 16-18]. Such Azerbaijan is from the countries discussed. (Table 9).

 Table 9.  Foreign Direct Investment, net (BoP, Mln current US$)

Year	1995	2003	2007	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	-	-330.8	-1679	-682,7	-710.0	-983,3	-726.0	-900.7	-1411	-1343	1196	1594
Azerbaijan	-330.1	-2 352	5035	-147.2	-331.2	-932.6	-812.4	-1142	-2443	-838.3	-1926	-303,1
Armenia	-25.3	-122.5	-653.9 (2008Y.= -925.1)	-709.6	-521.4	-437.3	-480.8	-319.5	-387.9	-161.5	-271.9	-223.5

Drawn up: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS?locations=GE  11.01.2019 

Azerbaijan dominates as well as attracting foreign direct investment, as well as exporting investments (including Georgia). The issue of foreign investments in the GDP of transitional economies is also important. (Table 10).

Table 10. Foreign Direct Investment, Net Inflows (% of GDP)

Year	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	8.4	9.6	7.1	15.1	18.5	12.5	6.1	7.7	8.1	6.0	6.4	11.0	11.9	11.0	12.0
Azerbai-jan	55.1	54.4	33.8	21.4	13.9	8.2	6.6	6.4	6.8	7.6	3.5	5.9	7.6	11.9	7.0
Armenia	4.4	6.9	6.0	7.3	7.3	8.1	8.8	5.7	6.4	4.7	4.7	3.5	1.7	3.2	2.2

Drawn up: worldbank.org/indicator/BX.KLT.DINV.WD.GD.ZS?locations=AM  11.01.2019.

        Attracting of more foreign direct investment doesn not mean more shares (%) in the country's GDP at the same time. In particular, in 2013-2017 Georgia has higher indicator in comparison with Azerbaijan and Armenia. In the countries of transition economies Inflation has a sharp impact on low real income of population. (Table 11).

Table 11. Inflation, consumer prices (annual %)

Year	1995	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	162.7	0.8	20.8	1.4	5.7	7.9	1.1	2.4	1.4	4.0	12.5	12.9
Azerbaijan	411.8	2.2	27.8	-18.9	13.8	22.6	2.9	0.5	-0.6	-8.9	14.7	16.0
Armenia	176.0	4.7	9.0	3.4	8.2	7.7	2.6	5.8	3.0	3.7	-1.4	1.0

Drawnup:https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FP.CPI.TOTL.ZG?locations=AM&year_low_desc=false 11.01.2019.

      In 2016-2017 increase in consumer prices has been observed in Azerbaijan in comparison with Armenia and Georgia due to high inflation.

          The development of the economy stimulates the creation of new jobs and reduces the size of the work prce outflow from the country. [9-10; 21-22]. (Table 12).

Year	1991	2003	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Georgia	10.1	11.5	16.5	16.8	16.3	15.1	15.0	14.6	12.4	12.0	11.8	11.6
Azerbaijan	9.1	9.4	6.1	5.8	5.6	5.4	5.2	5.0	4.9	5.0	5.0	5.0
Armenia	2.0	14.5	18.0	18.7	19.0	18.4	17.3	16.2	17.5	18.3	18.1	18.2

Drawn up: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS?locations=GE  11.01.2019.

   The unemployment rate in Azerbaijan is within the average European rate, which is decreased till 11.6% in Georgia and in Armenia it exceeds 18%. It is not accidental that there is high migration scale in Armenia and Georgia. (Table 13):

 Table 13. Net Migration

Year	1992	1997	2002	2007	2012	2017
Georgia	-544,069	-366,036	-277,521	-299,482	-305,269	-50,000
Azerbaijan	-115,116	-111,849	36,524	53,580	0	0
Armenia	-496,288	-223,873	-160,521	-183,361	-30,535	-24,989

Drawn up :worldbank.org/indicator/SM.POP.NETM?end=2017&start=1962&year_high_desc=true 11.01.2019.

 According to the net migration, Georgia and Armenia look unfavorable, which we can not say about Azerbaijan. Based on the World Bank's calculations, it is vivid that in 2017 in comparision with 1990, the population of Azerbaijan was 138%, Armenia's - 82.8% and Georgia's 77.4% [23].

References:

• Basilia, T., Silagadze, A., Chikvaidze, T. (2001). Post-Socialistic Transformation: Georgian Economy at the Threshold of XXI Century. “Aradani”, Tbilisi. (In Georgian.).
• Беридзе Т., Исмайлов Э., Папава В.(2004). Центральный кавказ и  экономика Грузии. Баку,  «Нурлан ».
• Gogokhia, R. (2004).  Mixed Economic System, Essence, Model, Development Trends. Tbilisi. (In Georgian.).
• Zubiashvili  T.,  Chikviladze  M.,  Silagadze N. (2018). Some Aspects of State External Debt. Ecoforum Journal 7 (2).
• Zubiashvili T., Silagadze  L. (2016). Some Aspects of the Georgian Economy at the Contemporary Stage. Ecoforum Journal. 5.2.
• Kakulia,M., Kapanadze,N. (2018). The Middle Class in Georgia: Quantitative Assessment, Dynamics and Profile. Tbilisi.
• Mekvabishvili, E., Atanelishvili, T. (2017). Personal Remittances in Post-Soviet Countries (comparative analysis). Bull. Georg. Acad. Sci., 11, 3.
• Papava V., Silagadze A., 2019. “On the Translating of the “Gross Domestic Product” into Georgian.” Economics and Business, No. 1, p. ? (In Georgian).
• Silagadze A. (2018). Gini Index – Wealth Distribution in the Post-Soviet Countries   Bull. Georg. Natl. Acad.Sci., 12, 3.
• Silagadze A. (2017). Post-Soviet „Paradoxes” of Unemployment Rate. Bull. Georg. Natl. Acad.Sci., 11, 1.
• Silagadze, A., Zubiashvili, T. (2016). Georgia’s Economy Against the Background of the Associate Agreement with the European Union. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 59, 2: 533-540. (USA).
• Silagadze, A., Zubiashvili, T. (2016). Foreign Direct Investment in Georgia. International Journal of Arts and Science. 9, 2: 63-72. (USA).
• Silagadze, A. (2015). Failure of the Keynesian Multiplier Doctrine: some aspects of interrelation between Investments and employment. “Topical Problems of Sustainable Development of National Economies.” TSU, Paata Gugushvili Institute of Economics. Tbilisi.
• Silagadze, A., Zubiashvili, T. (2015). Parameters of the European Union and the Post-Soviet Georgia’s Economy. Refereed International Journal of Business and Management Studies (IJBMS), pp. 441–448.
• Silagadze, A. (2013). Priorities for the Economy of Postcommunist Georgia in the Context of the World Financial Crisis. J. Problems of Economic Transition (USA). 56, 8: 3–16.
• Silagadze, A., Atanelishvili, T. (2010). Modern State Finances of Georgia. Peninsula University of Technology, Business and Informatics. San Francisco.
• Silagadze, A., Gelashvili,S. (2009). Gegenwärtige Finanzlage und Monetäre Aspekte in Georgien. No. G-10. Universität Potsdam.
• Silagadze, A., Tokmazishvili,M.(2009). Challenges of the Post-communist Financial-currency Policy. Nova Science Pub Incorporated. New York.
• Tvalchrelidze, A., Silagadze, A. (2013). The macroeconomic model for oil exporter countries. J. Central Asia and the Caucasus, 16, Issue 4: 118–144, Sweden.
• Tvalchrelidze,  A., Silagadze, A., Keshelashvili, G., Gegia, D. (2011). Georgia’s Social Economic Development Program. “Nekeri”, Tbilisi.
• Tukhashvili M. (2018). Retrospective Comprehension of Post-Soviet Georgia’s Population Migration. Bull. Georg. Natl. Acad. Sci., 6, 2.
• Kharaishvili, E., Erkomaishvili, G., Chavleishvili, M. (2015). Problems faced by the agricultural sector and agribusiness development strategy in Georgia, International Science Index 107. International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic and Management Engineering, 9 (11).
• Worldbank.org/indicator   11.01.2019.

---