Simiilarities and Diffierences Between Australian & Russian Economy

Economic growth

The performance of the Russian economy since the 1998 crisis has been impressive. Between 1998 and 2005, Russian GDP expanded by an estimated 48 percent, while real incomes of the population grew by 46 percent. Poverty (headcount) rates were cut in half and regional disparities declined somewhat. The pace of growth began to slow in 2001 and 2002, along with the steady weakening of the factors the supported the initial growth, although a major strengthening of oil, gas, and other prices on Russia's commodity exports gave a new boost to economic growth since 2003. Modernization and productivity growth outside the oil and gas sector have also been important contributing factors to the recent expansion.

Russian economic growth in 2005 has been influenced by three primary factors: a continuing rapid expansion of domestic incomes and demand, improvements in the expectations of investors, and growing competitive pressures from the real appreciation of the ruble.

Australia is a relatively small economy, with a population of only 20 million people, and a national output that is ranked only just within the world's top twenty. While Australia's national output is well ahead of neighbours such as New Zealand and Indonesia, it is well behind the outputs of Japan, China, the United States and many European nations. The main reason why our economy is small is because of our small population. The Russian Federation, however, is a relatively large country yet suffered many economic downfalls during a period of time which has therefore attributed to its slightly under-developed economy.

Employment and Unemployment

Russia's workforce totalled 78,374,600 people in 2003. Employment opportunities have changed radically as a result of the economic transition. Industry, for example, employed about 40 percent of the workforce in 1990, but only 29 percent in 1999. Meanwhile, the number of people employed in services increased rapidly. By 1999 this sector employed 59 percent of the workforce.

One of the Soviet system's strengths was its commitment to mass education, and the population's high level of education and skill has often been cited as a positive factor for Russia's economic future. However, the 1990s fiscal crisis did serious damage to the educational system, and some analysts believe that the deterioration of the system may hamper the country's economic revitalization.

Virtually unknown during the Soviet period, unemployment became a serious problem in the early 1990s. Estimates indicate that the national unemployment rate peaked at about 13 percent in 1999. The real level may have been considerably higher, because some employees who were counted as full-time workers actually worked only part time or not at all; even individuals who were not receiving wages often preferred to remain on the official rolls in order to obtain work benefits such as housing subsidies and social insurance. By 2002 the official unemployment rate declined to 8.6 percent, although some regions had much higher levels of joblessness.

The employment and unemployment rates for both countries are immensely varied. Despite Australia's growth, it still has tended to have relatively high levels of unemployment. Russia's unemployment rate however, is due to its preceding economic crisis.

Standard of Living/Quality of Life

In relation to 'quality of life', Australia and Russia are drastically contrasting. The Human Development Index is a popular measure of a country's achievements in terms of life expectancy, educational attainment and adjusted real income. It has recently ranked Russia as the 60th best country to live in, and Australia as the 3rd. There is evidently as large difference between the two countries.

Russia has a unique contemporary history, full of political and economic changes. Serious economic crises in 1992 and 1998 are believed to have dramatically affected the quality of life. Australia on the other hand is believed to enjoy a quality of life amongst the highest in the world. It is one of the world's most desirable places to live and to work

The city rankings for 'the worldwide 2005 cost of living survey 2005' indicate differences in the cost of living between Australian cities and Russia's. Moscow, Russia's capital city is ranked in 4th place and St Petersburg, another major city in 15th place. Australia's highest ranking is Sydney in 20th position. However, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth are also ranked within the top 100.Australia's cost of living is what makes is such an attractive destination, items such as food, entertainment, school fees and health care are relatively low in comparison to other major countries. The problem with Russia is that people receive low wages and therefore the cost of necessities is relatively high.

Australia and Russia also greatly differ in terms of adopting new technologies. Australia ranks highly in terms of both PC usage, and internet usage. Russia on the other hand is still in its infancy compared by Western standards. With a population of 150 million people, only 200 000- 300 000 people are connected to the internet. Australia relies heavily on telecommunications technology, whilst for Russia inadequate telecommunications infrastructure which it is not expected to meet Western standards for many years to come. Russia does not contain enough telephone lines; existing lines are slow and poor in quality and people fear high costs. This is a sharp contrast to the technological standard of living in Australia.

Environmental Quality

Russia and Australia contain large concentrations of natural resources. Australia's natural resources are a major part of its economy as they constitute most of its exports. Russia's economy is heavily reliant on extractive industries such as oil and gas. In that sense, both countries are alike in that natural resources are of great importance to them.

From the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia inherited a legacy of environmental problems. Russia's ongoing transition to a market based economy has meant that the government has been strongly disposed to promoting economic growth rather than environmental production. Both countries have been criticized in their environmental protection. Australia has attracted criticisms for its low level of land protection when compared to its large variety of flora and fauna that are threatened by land use. Russia has also attracted criticism from neighbouring