Emerging Economies (RUSSIA) - Research Paper Example

?RUSSIAN ECONOMY INTRODUCTION: The Soviet Union was considered as one of the most powerful and stable country in the world in 1980’s. The Soviet Union was getting stronger and stronger with the passage of time. The country was also stable economically. However, the policies devised and adopted by the country weakened the economic and political situation which eventually resulted in disintegration of Soviet Union. However, the analysts are of the view that the basic reason of political and economic collapse of the Soviet Union was the culture of War which caused severe impacts on the economic and political situations of the country. This increased war culture also affected the budget of the country and a greater portion of the budget was reserved only for the military. This increase in the military budget was made at the expense of the investment in the economy. By the mid of decade of 1980, half of the total output of the country was consumed by the Soviet military only. This caused the shortages of the industrial commodities for the country and general public as a whole. Moreover, the commodities available in the market of Soviet Union were also not considered fit for use as all the commodities and goods which were in good condition were taken up by the military. Consequently, the consumers of the Soviet Union started importing the industrial goods to satisfy their desires. The economic factors that resulted in collapse of Soviet Union were also closely linked to the psychological factors affecting the people of the country. As the market was glooming day by day due to availability of few products and commodities in the market, the people were getting more and more depressed. Those who could import the goods from other countries satisfied their needs, but the other portion of the public suffered a lot. This had severe impacts on the psychological situations of the people and also on their working patterns and habits. The level of distrust in the government was so high that the workers often said that the government pretended that they were paying them for their work and they pretended that they were working for the government. The analysts are of the view that the incentives for the production were very low. In some cases, the workers were not given any incentives for the efforts they put in. This deterred the workers from working. Grigory Yavlinsky, a Russian economist, was of the view that the system of the system was not functioning properly because the workers were not working (Thayer, W. Silicon, V) At the time when the Soviet Union was facing great depression and economical instability, the Reagan administration in US decided to increase the military budget. They also proposed to implement an antiballistic missile system. This caused the Soviet Union to increase its military budget to maintain parity with United States. But at this stage, it was impossible for the Soviet Union to increase the share of its budget share for the military. The authorities of the Soviet Union decided to end the cold war and also the arms race which resulted in the allocation of a greater portion of budget to fulfill the military purposes only. However, this also removed the possibility of an invasion by external forces. Thus, the people of the Soviet Union also refused to accept the totalitarian system of government. As a result, the whole political system of the country was disintegrated and the Soviet Union collapsed. The post-Soviet period was a tough time for Russia. Especially, the transition period brought great challenges for the Russian government and public. The ways and methods that were adopted by the Russian administration to deal with these challenges are of significant importance. Moreover, the revolutionary changes that were brought by the Russian government in the field of education, industry and resource sectors are worth-mentioning. The economic policies adopted by the government in immediate post-Soviet period are also of great importance. POST-SOVIET PERIOD: The Russian economy became one of the most important aspects in the immediate period after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The economy was suffering great difficulties. The feature of the economy that was causing the difficulties was the disintegration of the economic system in which the provisions of utilities and other goods and services to the general public were planned centrally. The state had the complete control over the investment made in various sectors, the means of production available and the consumption and production patterns of the economy. This economic system had been in force in the Soviet Union for about sixty years period. Thus, the economy which was solely controlled by the state was being replaced with capitalism in which the economy is controlled and balanced by the free market forces. Russia had no previous experience of such type of economy, so it was adding to the difficulties for the Russian economic conditions and the transition of Russia. Russia also lacked the institutions which were required to operate such type of economy. Moreover, the Russian economy had opted the capitalism, though it was not easy for the Russian administration to free the state quickly and easily from the deep rooted communism economic system. The administration was also trying to devise ways in order to achieve long term stabilization of the market economy and also to reshape the economic structure while switching from centrally owned economy to a free market economy. In centrally based economy, the foreign exchange rates and the prices of goods and services remain stable. So, these require monetary and fiscal policies that are suitable in such environment. On the other hand, in a capitalist economy, the prices are unstable and are highly dependent on the market forces such as supply and demand of various commodities (US Library of Congress). The transition which was undertaken by Russia faced numerous challenges and obstacles. At that time, the main focus of the Russian administration was to devise policies and procedures which minimized the obstacles causing hindrance to the transition process. The economists identified that the management practices prevailing in the Soviet economy is causing a great difficulty in applying new economy system efficiently. Moreover, the perished infrastructure of the Russian state left over after disintegration of the Soviet Union and the inefficient and ineffective supply systems prevailing in the state were also adding to the difficulties which were slowing down the transition process. The only methods by which the transition process may be accelerated were to introduce economic reforms on National level and to actuate the general public and the investors to accept those reforms wholeheartedly. Thus, the Russian government came up with a number of economic reforms in 1990 (US Library of Congress). ECONOMIC REFORMS IN RUSSIA (1990s): 1. YELTSIN ECONOMIC PROGRAM OF RESTRUCTURING AND STABILIZATION: In October 1991, Yeltsin along with his economic advisers including Yegor Gaydar, a great reform economist, designed a program of economic reforms in Russia. At that time, the process of disintegration of the great Soviet Union was in process. The judgmental powers of the Russian president were extended in order to implement the complete reforms program easily. The program set targets for the Russian government till 1993. Achievement of economic stabilization and proper economic restructuring were the basic objectives of the program. The program suggested to reduce government spending and to frame the subsidies to be given on consumer and producer commodities. The program also aimed at upgrading its tax collection structures along with the imposition of new taxes in order to increase the government revenue and to reduce the budget deficit from 20 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to only 3 percent of GDP by the end of 1993. The program also required the Central Bank of Russia (RCB) to control the growth of money supply in order to reduce inflation to 3 percent per month by the mid of 1993 from 12 percent per month as in 1991. In restructuring its economy, Yeltsin program required the government to lift the price controls restrictions on most of the consumer and intermediate goods. This resulted in increase in prices of all the goods. However, the government kept some control over the food staples and on energy services which are produced and supplied by monopoly suppliers. The basic aim of lifting such controls over prices of various commodities was to establish a free market economy where the prices through demand and supply forces of the market with little intervention from the government. Some economists are also of the view that such deregulation of prices along with strict monetary policies were made with a view to reduce the industrial production, decline in restructuring of companies, bankruptcies and increase in unemployment. The measures are thought to be taken by state-owned companies’ managers who were not capable of operating in such a free-market economy (Global Street Trade: Ch 3- Behind the Crisis). A complete new system of tax was also introduced that included Value added tax on most of the transactions, tax on income from business and a progressive rates of income tax, new rates of taxes regarding domestic energy and revisions in systems of export taxes and import tariffs. New taxes were also imposed on the export of natural gas and oil resources in order to reduce the gap between the prices of these resources at domestic level and in the world market. This also assisted the weak Russian economy to prevent the shortages of energy resources to the domestic users. Yeltsin economic program also lifted many restrictions that were imposed in Soviet Union period regarding foreign investment and trade. This helped the Russian economy to expose itself to the prices prevailing in the international market. Despite that Yeltsin economic program required the Russian Central Bank to control the growth of money, the money supply was increased at enormous rates in the years of 1992 and 1993 which resulted in high inflation. By the end of 1992, the supply of money in the economy had increased by the eighteen times more than the money supply in 1990. The deficit of Russian budget had also increased to 20 percent of GDP by the end of 1992. The deficit was financed by further supply of money which in turn resulted in appreciation of inflation rate which reached to 2000 percent in the year 1992. In late 1992, Yeltsin dismissed Yegor Gaydar. Viktor Chernomyrdin established new government with the economic reformer Boris Fedorov. Fedorov focused on economic stabilization of Russia in the period of such economic recession. In 1993, Fedorov introduced a program to control economic crisis. The program included the implementation of tight fiscal and monetary policies. The government was required to control the credit emissions and money supply. The Russian Central Bank was required to increase credits’ rates of interests by issuing government bonds. The government was also required to finance the budget deficit partially and to close the state-owned enterprises that were working inefficiently. The program also required the government to prepare deficit budget targets for each quarter and by restricting the wage increases in government enterprises. The money printing and credit expansion were also moderated in 1993. However, the stabilization was not given much importance by the RCB and by certain industrialists and agricultural lobbies. As a result, the inflation started again at a threatening pace. This inflation was a sign of decreasing confidence in the Russian currency and economy. To strictly control the inflation, the Parliament passed a resolution not to finance the state budget deficit with money supply. As a result, the Ministry of Finance started issuing government bonds to finance the budget deficits. 1995 budget also aimed to reduce the budget deficit to an acceptably low level to receive international funding and also to achieve economic stabilization as soon as possible. In the years of 1995 and 1996, the government kept the budget deficit within the prescribed limits by reducing its spending. In 1996, concerns were raised about ineffective and inefficient system of tax collection which caused obstacles for the government to achieve revenue targets. Various reforms to improve tax collection system were also introduced but a strong pattern of non compliance with tax regulations has been established by the end of the year (US Library of Congress). 2. PRIVATIZATION: After deregulation of prices, the Russian administration took steps to introduce privatization in the economy. The earlier reforms that were adopted by the Russian government had caused the government to lose control over staff of many companies. However, the process of privatization took place in a series of steps which started in 1992 and was completed in 1994 (Global Street Trade: Ch 3- Behind the Crisis). The conversion of the largest economy of the world into market economy from state-controlled economy was a difficult task. This required a great care to complete this task successfully. The stabilization and liberal reforms were first introduced by Yegor Gaydar who is also known as promoter of Shock Therapy. Shock Therapy refers to release of controls over currency and prices, independence of trade, state subsidies withdrawal and privatization of state-owned companies and enterprises on a large scale. Some economists considered the Use of Shock Therapy as a useless and ineffective that would push Russia in worse situation. They were of the view that the Shock Therapy is effective only in a situation when a proper infrastructure and legal and regulatory frameworks are present. In the absence of such infrastructure, legal and regulatory frameworks and the non-presence of necessary economic components, the method is occupied by its own flaws and thus, do not work properly. However, Russia adopted Shock Therapy as a tool to release itself from the state of economic recession. The process of privatization is often carried on through auctions which involve the auction of only one state owned enterprise at a time. But Russia had thousands of enterprises which were required to be privatized. Moreover, most of such enterprises were not economically viable. At that time the auctions to sell one enterprise at a time did not seem to be reasonable as these did not seem to meet the timetable proposed by shock therapy and also increased the risk of purchase of most of the firms by the foreigners. Thus, Mass privatization technique was adopted for undertaking privatization program. The process was started short after the collapse of Soviet Union and the program had been completely framed by the end of October 1991. In January 1992, Yeltsin ordered the independence of foreign trade, price regulation by industrialists and currency. This also caused import of goods from foreign markets into Russia and thus, the monopolies of state-owned enterprises were broken. The privatization was initially started by selling small enterprises through public auctions. The process of privatization continued till the end of 1995. The pace of privatization was kept steady during the whole period of privatization and was in accordance with the program initially established for the process. Approximately one third of the total number of enterprises that were in existence in the state at that time were got privatized till 1993. In 1992, the voucher privatization scheme was also adopted by the government. The vouchers were distributed to the citizens of Russia. The purchase of vouchers by a person meant the purchase of shares in an enterprise. However, the vouchers could be sold by the voucher holders and the sale value was subjected to the economic conditions of the country. The program of voucher privatization successfully achieved the goals of privatization and almost 70 percent of large enterprises and 90 percent of small enterprises were got privatized through this program by the end of 1994. Moreover, 14000 firms that employed two-thirds of total industrial labors were also got privatized. However, the Russian government had no administrative capacity at that time to force privatization. During the process of privatization, the managers and employees were given more importance as they were considered influential enough to affect the process of privatization. They were offered shares at very low prices. As a result, more than 60 percent of the shares privatized were owned by managers and employees only, 20 percent by individuals outside the firm and other investment corporations and the remaining 20 percent by the government in order to sell those shares on cash in future. Although, there was a possibility that the control of workers or managers over the privatized companies would limit the oversight of managers by the shareholders, the Russian government believed that these owners would be able to run the enterprise more effectively than that of state (Bernard B, 1999). The political conditions of the country hampered the privatization program during 1995 and 1996. The corruption scandals that came into light during 1995 also brought a poor image of the program in the public. They were of the view that the process of privatization had done nothing but the shifting of the enterprise control from state to individuals or group having connections with the government internally. In the next phase of privatization process, the shares of the state in the privatized enterprises and also in state enterprises were sold for cash. The program was completed virtually by the end of first quarter of 1996. This resulted in the increase in government reserves but did not allow the government to gather the expected revenues. The process of privatization was also hampered during such period due to presidential elections. Meanwhile, the allegations were also placed upon irregularities and illegality in the privatization process. The government also admitted that some malpractices have occurred during the privatization process. This caused the Yeltsin administration to reduce the pace of privatization until the holding of presidential elections. Thus, the process of privatization was slowed down in 1996. After reelection of Yeltsin, the privatization process started again and more than ten large state-owned enterprises were sold. However, the attention was paid on the fact that the role of workers and managers of a firm were reduced to a reasonable level. The recipients who would be able to hold shares for a particular period of time rather than selling them immediately after the purchase, were targeted during the privatization process in 1996. The process of privatization in Russia is considered as a great success. There were some periodic delays that occurred during the period and some allegations were also made regarding corruption and favoritism in carrying out the transactions. However, the way in which the capital assets are moved from state to individuals is excellent. Moreover, the process of privatization was completed without much break in the process and without any reestablishment of state control over certain assets (US Library of Congress). 3. RESOURCE SECTOR EXPANSION: Russia is the holder of the world’s largest gas reserves, coal reserves that are second largest and oil reserves that are eighth largest in the world. It is the also the largest exporter of gas and the second largest exporter of oil. It is also the third largest consumer of energy resources. In the system of Soviet Union, the wastage of natural resources was not given much importance. Government felt that the natural resources are so abundant that their waste would not cost much to the economy. However, after the disintegration of Soviet Union, great emphasis was put on Natural Resources and the fact was understood that these resources are not unlimited. On the other hand, it was also understood that they are quite volatile and cannot be treated as a basis for extended economic growth. Moreover, many studies have revealed that the presence of natural resources may happen to be unfavorable for the company’s development. This is due to the reason that the accompanied positive and negative effects of additional wealth can be assessed as unfavorable for the development of the country. This seems to be unreal but in fact, it may happen due to Dutch disease effect. Dutch disease is negative effect on the economy due to anything, such as discovery of gas reserves, which increases the foreign currency inflow sharply, which in turn leads to appreciation in currency value. This inflow of foreign currency also makes the other products less competitive in prices in the export market. Deindustrialization and cheap imports at higher levels are also caused by such foreign currency inflows (Financial Times Lexicon, 2012). The Dutch disease problem can occur in the crisis situations where the main purpose of the state is to become rich soon and easily. The same case was with Russia in its Post-Soviet period. Russia is a land rich with reserves of various natural resources. Thus, it may get major part of its revenues from resource sector only. However, with the evolution of such huge reserves of Natural resources, the tradable production is concentrated to a high extent in the resource sector. This leads to decrease in production in manufacturing sector. Thus, capital and labor is shifted from manufacturing sector to natural resource production sector. Thus, it hampers the already existing manufacturing sector and also prevents it from further development. That is why, it is said that Dutch disease is affecting both developed and developing countries (Westernhagen, N., 2002). Before analyzing that whether the Dutch disease existed or not in the case of Russia, it is useful to analyze the symptoms of Dutch disease. a. Real Appreciation in Currency: The exchange rate of the ruble has appreciated in value by more than 50% over the 7 years period of 2000-2007 (Ronald B., 2007). However, the appreciation in the value of ruble may have occurred either due to increase in inflow of foreign currency or due to increase in the labor productivity to a high extent. During that period, the international market oil prices were also increased which may also cause appreciation in the value of ruble. However, the increase in the oil prices during the period was too small to cause appreciation in the value of ruble. If these two factors are analyzed closely, it came into light that the labor productivity started to increase just after the 1998 crisis and was doubled by the end of 2007. b. Service Sector Growth: If we consider the data of growth of service sector and manufacturing sector, it appears that growth has occurred both in service and manufacturing sector after 1998. Thus, there appears to be no indication of de-industrialization in a real sense. The relative decrease in manufacturing sector was occurred only due to the transition process and thus, do not indicate the presence of Dutch disease in the economy. The manufacturing employment was decreased from 2000 to 2004. However, this may happen due to increase in the productivity level in manufacturing sector and also increase in the available capacity utilization. Moreover, the same happened also in 2000, 2002 and 2004 in the resource sector. Thus, this may not be suggested as an indication of Dutch disease. The growth in the service sector also resulted from filling the jobs that was necessary in the consumer oriented society (GurOfer, 1973).If the effects of transition process occurring after 1990 are eliminated, we would not find any significant effects that the oil prices would have on the manufacturing sector growth. It indicates that the Russian economy was not effecting from Dutch Disease. c. Growth in Real Wages: There is a growth in real wages occurring from 2000. This increase in wages is consistent with the spending effects and also with the movement of resources. Initially, the wage growth occurred in fuel sector. However, the growth of labor wages was also rapid in other sectors. But there were some other factors that caused the rapid growth of real wages. The crisis of 1998 was one of the factors causing real growth in the wages. The wages were reduced significantly in 1999 and were increased again in 2000. Another main factor is the productivity growth that resulted in the increase in the real wage growth in the Russian economy. Thus, the other factors indicate that the increase in real wage growth after 2000 were due to reasons other than that of Dutch disease. So, the Russian economy cannot be expected to be suffering from Dutch disease. 4. EDUCATION: The education system in Russia has been developing day by day. The development has taken place in the context of cultural, social and economic changes that took place with the passage of time in Russia, especially after the crisis of 1990. In 2005, some key priorities regarding the development of system of education were approved by the Ministry of Education of Russian federation. These priorities include: Development of modern system of professional education. Quality assurance of education and easy accessibility of such education by the general public Encouragement the investment in education system. The education system helped in increasing and giving boost to the innovation and development in research and development fields. The research activity also increased at pace. The students getting professional educational in engineering, science and other technical fields are being given much emphasis. That is why Russia is the largest number of personnel in the world that are working in the field of research and development. It also stands at third number in respect of per capita number of scientists and engineers of the world. The Information Technology has also grown to the third largest in the world. However, the pace of development in education system may be obtained much faster than that at present. However, if cooperation is made between education institutions and scientific organizations together with the financing of scientific research projects, the research and development may flourish rapidly and can achieve great developments in the sector of research and development. CONCLUSION: Russia is doing much better now. The economic growth is steady and prosperous. Unlike other Soviet states, Russia is performing most effectively and efficiently. The GDP of the Russian Federation is increasing consistently. The comparison of Russian economy with some other states in this regard would be helpful in determining the effectiveness of Russian economic reforms and the present economic performance of Russia. Ukraine emerged as an independent state in 1991. The pace of growth was not much slower than that of other states in the region. But unlike Russia, the foundation on which the growth was dependent was not sustainable. For years, Ukraine imported gas from Russia on very low prices. The country is now very much dependent on imported gas and the 70 percent of gas consumed is imported (Sutela, P. 2012). Kazakhstan was another Soviet state. Like other soviet states, it had also gone through the period of great recession in the decade of 1990. Now, the economy is much stable. However, when compared to Russia, Kazakhstan seems to be far behind in economic development. The exports amount to about $41 billion while imports amount to $25 billion. On the other hand, in Russia such exports amount to more than $498 billion and imports are $310 billion. Though the exports of Kazakhstan exceeds its imports, the quantum is very small as compared to the quantum of exports and imports of Russia. The GDP of Russia is also much higher at present which is $1,885 billion per year while it is only $180 billion in case of Kazakhstan. However, the GDP growth pace of Kazakhstan (7.5%) is better than that of Russia (4.3%). Kazakhstan is also a country facing high inflation rate of 7.5% per year while the inflation rate in case of Russia is only 3.7% per year. Poland is a country of Central Europe. Poland also remained under the rule of Soviet Union till 1989. After independence, like Russia, Poland also used shock Therapy to obtain economic stabilization. Poland also faced some difficulties before achieving stabilization but now the country is economically stable and functioning well in economic terms. However, when compared with Russia, Russian economy seems to be functioning much better than the Polish economy. GDP of Poland is about $531 billion while that of Russia is $1885 billion. The GDP growth rate is same both in Russian and Poland i.e. 4.3% per annum. The exports of Poland amounted to $159 billion while imports were calculated to be $178 billion in 2010. On the other hand, exports of Russia are $498 billion and imports amount to $310 billion in 2010. Thus, the net exports bring foreign exchange for Russia unlike Poland where the imports exceed the exports. However, inflation rate is higher in Russia (3.7%) than that in Poland (2.7%). China is a country with highly stable economy. Its economy is ranked at 2nd in the world. China also exercised Shock Therapy while adopting conversion from Communist economy to free market economy. The economy is now quite stable and considered one of the strongest economies in the world. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of China is $7.43 trillion while it is $1.885 trillion in case of Russia. The GDp growth rate of 9.5% is also much higher as compared to Russia that GDP growth rate is 4.3%. the exports and imports of China are also too large, that is, $1.897 trillion and $1.664 trillion respectively. However, inflation rate in China is 5.4% that is higher than that of Russia where inflation rate is 3.7%. however, in all other aspects, China has a much stable economy and government than that of Russia. So, with the help of above statistics and comparison with other states, we may conclude that in current day world Russia is doing much better. Russia is also improving day by day in the world scenario. The GDP of Russia is constantly increasing after the economic collapse of 1998. Only, in 2008, the Russia GDP fell when the whole world was shocked by economic disaster. Except for the economic conditions of 2008, Russian is progressing day by day with increasing international trade and increased productivity by the economy as a whole. REFERENCES 1. Bernard Black. Kraakam and Tarassova, Russian Privatization and Corporate Governance: What Went Wrong? (Stanford Law School, 1999), accessed April 4, 2012, http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/41203/1/wp269.pdf. 2. Economic Reform in the 1990s (US Library of Congress), accessed April 4, 2012, http://countrystudies.us/russia/57.htm. 3. Environmental Problems (US Library of Congress), accessed April 4, 2012, http://countrystudies.us/russia/25.htm 4. Financial Times Lexicon. Dutch Disease. (2012), accessed April 4, 2012, http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=Dutch%20disease 5. Global Steel Trade: Structure Problems and Future Solutions. Ch 3: Behind the Crisis, accessed April 4, 2012, http://www.ita.doc.gov/media/ch3.pdf 6. GurOfer, The Service Sector in Soviet Economic Growth: A Comparative Study, (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard UP, 1973). 7. Isaac, J., Economic Shock Therapy (Political Science Teachers Blog, 2012), accessed April 4, 2012, http://pol-teach.blogspot.com/2012/02/2shock-therapy.html. 8. Is Dutch Disease Responsible for Russia's energy dependent industrial structure? Accessed April, 4, 2012, http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDwQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsiteresources.worldbank.org%2FINTRANETTRADE%2FResources%2FTopics%2FAccession%2F438734-1109706732431%2FNaturalResources_Eng.doc&ei=mGZ3T-qjLY22hAf6ptyeDQ&usg=AFQjCNHSpnT-tjc9jOyv6rjitdwqa4zv2g 9. NationMaster.com. Economy Stats Kazakhstan vs. Russia. Accessed April 5, 2012, http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/Kazakhstan/Russia/Economy 10. Roland Beck, Annette Kamps, Elitza Mileva, (European Central Bank Report, 2007), “Long- term Growth Prospects for the Russian Economy.” 11. Shock Therapy (Economics), accessed April 4, 2012, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_therapy_(economics) 12. Sutela, P. Carnegie Endowment. The Underachiever: Ukraine’s Economy Since 1991, (2012), accessed April, 4, 2012, http://carnegieendowment.org/2012/03/09/underachiever-ukraine-s-economy-since-1991 13. Thayer Watkins, Silicon Valley and Tornado Alley, The Economic Collapse of the Soviet Union (USA: San Jose State University), accessed April 4, 2012, http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/sovietcollapse.htm. 14. The Economy (US Library of Congress), accessed April 4, 2012, http://countrystudies.us/russia/55.htm. 15. The School of Russia and Asian Studies, “The Growth of Russia’s IT Outsourcing Industry: The beginning of Russian Economic Diversification?” accessed April, 4, 2012, http://www.sras.org/russian_it_and_economic_diversification 16. Westernhagen, N., Contributions to Economics: Systemic Transformation Trade and Economic Growth, (Physica- Verlag: A Springer- Verlag Company, 2002) New York. Read More