Ukraine Annual Review 2011: a recovery that did not become a foundation
Two years of growth ended without restoring investment, repairing credit or building domestic demand. The year's most consequential event was a court case that delayed the country's most valuable trade agreement by three years.
The year in one paragraph
Ukraine grew for a second year on external demand, passed a pension reform because an external programme required it, failed to raise household energy tariffs and lost the programme as a result, and saw the signature of its association agreement with the EU suspended over a political prosecution — three years before it was eventually signed.
The four quarters
Q1 — recovery on exports; the IMF tariff conditions unmet.
Q2 — pension reform adopted; reserves used to hold the exchange rate.
Q3 — the political case freezes the EU relationship as the agreement negotiations conclude.
Q4 — agreement initialled but unsigned; external position deteriorating.
What the year cost
The delay to the association agreement is the year's largest measurable economic cost, and it was entirely self-inflicted.
The agreement's trade provisions eventually delivered a transformation in Ukrainian agricultural and food exports. Every year of delay was a year in which that transformation did not begin, in which certification investment was postponed, and in which Ukrainian producers continued selling into markets that paid less.
The second cost was the lapsed IMF programme, which removed both the financing and the external discipline that had produced the pension reform. Nothing structurally significant was adopted after it stalled.
What carried into 2012
A fixed exchange rate under pressure with declining reserves. A softening global metals market. A construction programme with a completion date in June. A parliamentary election in October. And an unsigned trade agreement whose signature depended on a political question the government did not intend to resolve.
The commercial reading
2011 is the year to point to when explaining why political risk in this market is not primarily about instability.
Nothing unstable happened in 2011. There was no revolution, no currency crisis, no government collapse. What happened was a single legal decision that cost the country's exporters three years of market access — a specific, traceable, entirely avoidable commercial loss produced by a political choice.
That is the form political risk usually takes here. Not disorder, but a decision taken for domestic political reasons whose commercial cost falls on parties with no part in it.
Related in this archive
Share this analysis
Comments