Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Contradictions of institutional and economic environment: Experience of Kazakhstan


Objective: The purpose of the study is to assess the quality of economic growth in Kazakhstan. An attempt has been made to provide an analysis of the institutional and economic environment and an econometric assessment of the real indicators of the country’s development.

Research Design & Methods: To assess the degree of influence of certain indicators on economic growth, a regression analysis was carried out. For this, data were collected from 15 countries for 2000-2018. Since the sample combines temporal and spatial data, a panel data regression model was built to analyze the effect of the considered explanatory variables on GDP. To study a model with these characteristics, two different models can be used: a fixed effects (FE) model and a random effects (RE) model.

Findings: Based on the historical and logical analysis of theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of economic development and the constructed regression model of panel data, it is shown that an increase in the level of indicators selected in official statistics has a small effect on economic growth, that is, there is a discrepancy between target indicators government programs and actual results. The institutional features of the Kazakhstani development model, which cause economic lag, are revealed.

Implications & Recommendations: The current cyclical transition, complicated by the Covid-19 pandemic, has revealed weak links in the economies of many countries, caused by systemic contradictions accumulated over 30 years. Kazakhstan, as a country that has been building market relations only since the end of the 20th century, found itself in the grip of not only economic and political, but also institutional costs. One of the problems hindering the economic development of the nation is the contradiction between the political ambitions of the authorities and the real results of the implementation of state programs, the loss of public confidence.

Contribution & Value Added: The country’s development prospects are primarily predetermined by the state’s ability to solve accumulated problems. Therefore, it is important to identify them, solve, and then predict the real parameters of the country’s development. The importance of such a methodological approach is noted by scientists from the post-Soviet countries, who study the factors that hinder the development of these countries.


business environment, institutions, institutional economics, new markets, real economic growth, social inequality, quality of life of the population

(PDF) Save

Author Biography

Madina Tulegenova

Associate Professor at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University (Kazakhstan). The main research specialization is the world economy.

Zhansaya Temerbulatova

PhD Student at the Department of Economics of Al-Farabi Kazakh National University (Kazakhstan). The main research specialization is international competitiveness and green economy.

Aifer Baimukhametova

Bachelor in Finance (2012), Master in Finance (2014). Currently PhD Student at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University (Kazakhstan).

Dinara Rakhmatullayeva

PhD in economics. Lecturer at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University (Kazakhstan).


  1. Al’bekova, A. (2018).Dorozhnayakartazanyatostiprivela k letal’nymiskhodam. «Zakonoposlushnykh» predprinimateleyzastavlyayutplatit’ za «nedobrosovestnykh» zayemshchikov [The employment roadmap has been fatal. “Law-abiding” entrepreneurs are forced to pay for “unscrupulous” borrowers]. Retrieved from on November 19, 2020.
  2. Auzan, A. A. (2011). Institutional economics for dummies. Moscow: Fashion Press.
  3. Balobanov, A. E., Golubev, S. V. (2011). Kachestvozhizni-klyuchevoyparametrsovremennoystrategiimirovogogoroda [Quality of life is a key parameter of the modern strategy of the world city]. Dokladyuchastnikovyubileynogo X Obshcherossiyskogoforumaliderovstrategicheskogoplanirovaniya (17-18 oktyabrya 2011 g, Sankt-Peterburg). [Reports of the participants of the jubilee X All-Russian Forum of Strategic Planning Leaders (October 17-18, 2011y, St. Petersburg)], 201. [in Russian].
  4. Banerjee, A.V., &Duflo, E.(2012). Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty. Vintage.
  5. Masanov, Y. (2018). Banki Kazakhstana: chto s nimi proiskhodiloposledniye 10 let.Retrieved from October 10, 2020.
  6. Chlebisz, A., & Mierzejewski, M. (2020). Determinants of GDP growth in Scandinavian countries with special reference to scientific progress. International Entrepreneurship Review, 6(3), 21-35.
  7. De Soto, H. (2004). Why capitalism triumphs in the West and is defeated in the rest of the world. Moscow: CJSC Olymp-Business.
  8. Kapital (2020).Dostatochno li MSB gosudarstvennoypodderzhki?Retrieved from on October 11, 2020.
  9. Ernst &Young (2020). The impact of the coronavirus crisis on SMEs in Kazakhstan. Report on the results of the survey of SMEs. Ernst & Young.
  10. Głodowska, A., Pera, B., & Wach, K. (2016). The International Environment and Its Influence on the Entrepreneurial Internationalization of Firms: The Case of Polish Businesses. Problemy Zarządzania, 14(3), 107-130.
  11. Głodowska, A. (2017). Business Environment and Economic Growth in the European Union Countries: What Can Be Explained for the Convergence?. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 5(4), 189-204.
  12. Humphreys, M., Sachs, J.D., & Stiglitz, J.E. (Eds.) (2007). Escaping the Resource Curse. New York: Columbia University Press.
  13. Tulekbajewa, A. (2019). Indeksschast’ya: ekspertyproverilisamochuvstviyekazakhstantsev(2019). Retrieved from September 2, 2020.
  14. Loginova, O. (2020). Kakkoronaviruspovliyal na suitsidy v mire i v Kazakhstane. Retrieved from October 10, 2020.
  15. Kursiv (2018). Kakuyurol’ v ekonomike RK igrayetmalyy i sredniy biznes?Retrieved from October 11, 2020
  16. Kursiv (2019). Kazakhstan zanyalvtoroye mesto v YEAES po urovnyusmertnostidetey. Retrieved from on October 11, 2020.
  17. Kuznets, S. (1946). National Income: Summary of Finding. The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 250(1).
  18. Lewis, A. W. (2013). Theory of Economic Growth. Routledge.
  19. Marx, K. (2017). Capital: a critique of political economy. Moscow: Eksmo.
  20. Nelson, R., &Winter, S. (2002). Evolutionary theory of economic changes. Moscow.
  21. Nureyev, R. M. (2008). Development economics: models of the formation of a market economy. Moscow: Norma, 367 p.
  22. International Energy Agency (2020). Retrieved from December 7, 2020
  23. National Bank of Kazakhstan (2020). Retrieved from December 7, 2020
  24. Statistics Committee of the Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan (2020). Retrieved from December 7, 2020
  25. World Bank (2020).Retrieved from December 7, 2020
  26. Sansyzbayeva, G., Temerbulatova, Z., Zhidebekkyzy, A., &Ashirbekova, L. (2020). Evaluating the transition to green economy in Kazakhstan: A synthetic control approach. Journal of International Studies, 13(1), 324-341.
  27. Schultz, T.W. (1971). Investment in Human Capital. The Role of Education and of Research. New York: The Free Press
  28. Smith, A. (2007). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Moscow: Eksmo.
  29. Sorokin, T. (2019). Ambitsii: stremleniyedostich’ uspekhailitshcheslaviye [Ambitions: the desire to achieve success or vanity].Retrieved November 19, 2020, from
  30. Bocharova, M., &Seyit, A. (2020). Statistikazanyatosti v Kazakhstane: pravdailimanipulyatsiya? Retrieved from on October 11, 2020.
  31. Stiglitz, J. (1997). Public Sector Economy. Moscow: Infra-M.
  32. Todaro, M. (1997). Economic development. Moscow: Nauka.
  33. Regnum (2020). Vsemirnyy bank prizval Kazakhstan otkazat’syaotneeffektivnykhgosprogramm. Retrieved from on December 7, 2020.
  34. Sputnik (2017). Yunisef: deti v Kazakhstaneumirayutiz-za khalatnostiidefitsitavrachey. Retrievedfrom on October 10, 2020.
  35. Żak, M., & Garncarz, J. (2020). Economic policy towards the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic in selected European Union countries. International Entrepreneurship Review, 6(4), 21-34.


Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.