Competition in cross-border markets of socially significant goods in Kazakhstan

In the context of the instability of global supply chains and increasing import dependence of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the competition problem in the cross-border markets of socially significant goods (SSG), such as medicines, food, beverages, and medical equipment, is particularly important. Strengthening the state's role in pricing and persistent logistical constraints requires rethinking the existing mechanisms for regulating and stimulating competition. The study of this topic allows us to identify the vulnerabilities of the economic model and determine areas for increasing the sustainability of the domestic market.

Purpose of the study. The purpose of this study is to analyze the current state of competition in the crossborder markets of the Republic of Kazakhstan for SSG, as well as to identify key barriers hindering the development of a competitive environment and formulate recommendations for improving public policy in this area.

Methodology. The study is based on an interdisciplinary approach, including an analysis of Kazakhstan's regulatory framework and that of foreign countries, quantitative and qualitative analyses of economic data, the results of a sociological survey, and semi-structured interviews with business entities and consumers. Particular attention is paid to the comparative analysis of legislation and mechanisms for regulating crossborder trade in socially significant goods.

Scientific novelty. The study's novelty lies in the comprehensive assessment of factors that negatively affect competition in the SSG segment, such as price regulation, import dependence, and regulatory and logistical barriers, emphasizing cross-border aspects of trade. For the first time, the results of an empirical study of the perception of competition by economic entities and consumers are presented.

Practical significance. The study results can be used to develop more effective antitrust policy instruments, optimize price regulation for SSG, and formulate measures to support domestic producers in the context of foreign economic competition.

1. Kalynets, K., Krykavskyy, Y., & Petecki, I. (2024). The role of marketing communications in the market for socially quasi-significant goods formation (on the example of metal-plastic products). Scientific Journal of Bielsko-Biala School of Finance and Law, 28(1), 38–42.

2. Official website of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2025). President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s state of the nation address. https://www.akorda.kz/en/president-kassym-jomart-tokayevs-state-ofthe-nation-address-181857

3. President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2024, July 30). On approval of the national development plan of the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2029... Decree № 611. Әділет. https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/U2400000611

4. Stiglitz, J. E. (2008). Selected works of Joseph E. Stiglitz: Volume I: Information and economic analysis (Vol. 1). OUP Oxford.

5. Smith, A. (1937). The wealth of nations (Originally published in 1776). n.a.

6. Sen, A. (1988). The concept of development. In Handbook of development economics (Vol. 1, pp. 9–26).

7. Robbins, D. (2003). Durkheim through the eyes of Bourdieu. Durkheimian Studies, 9(1), 23–39.

8. Arrow, K. J. (1973). Information and economic behavior. Federation of Swedish Industries.

9. Keynes, J. M. (1933). National self-sufficiency. Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review, 22(86), 177–193.

10. Samuelson, P. A. (1948). International trade and the equalisation of factor prices. The Economic Journal, 58(230), 163–184.

11. Hollander, S. (1977). Smith and Ricardo: Aspects of the nineteenth-century legacy. The American Economic Review, 67(1), 37–41.

12. Thomas, A. M. (2023). Ricardo and classical political economy. In The Anthem companion to David Ricardo.

13. Barnett, V. (2013). John Maynard keynes. Routledge.

14. Greenwald, B., & Stiglitz, J. (1993). New and old Keynesians. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(1), 23–44.

15. Porter, M. E. (1986). Competition in global industries: A conceptual. In Competition in global industries.

16. Porter, M. E. (1999). Michael Porter on competition. The Antitrust Bulletin, 44(4), 841–880.

17. Rosser, J. S. J. B. (2008). A Nobel Prize for asymmetric information: The economic contributions of George Akerlof, Michael Spence and Joseph Stiglitz. In Leading contemporary economists (pp. 162–181). Routledge.

18. Aikins, S. K. (2009). Political economy of government intervention in the free market system. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 31(3), 403–408.

19. Stiglitz, J. E. (2003). Economics for an imperfect world: Essays in honor of Joseph E. Stiglitz. MIT Press.

20. Yerimpasheva, A. T., Myrzakhmetova, A. M., & Alshimbayeva, D. U. (2022). Conjugation of the Eurasian Economic Union and the Belt Road Initiative: The role and place of Kazakhstan. R-economy, 8(2), 172–181.

21. Bhukiya, S., & Patel, R. (2023). The relationship between Logistics Performance Index and International Trade: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 4(3), 1505–1508. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.2023.32488

22. Sergi, B. S., D’Aleo, V., Konecka, S., Szopik-Depczyńska, K., Dembińska, I., & Ioppolo, G. (2021). Competitiveness and the Logistics Performance Index: The ANOVA method application for Africa, Asia, and the EU regions. Sustainable Cities and Society, 69, 102845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102845

23. Bilgin, C. (2022). The concept of logistics performance in international trade framework. In Research anthology on macroeconomics and the achievement of global stability (pp. 345–369). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-7460-0.ch020