**Table 1.4 Issues that cities face in the former Soviet Union and ways forward**

|**Period**|**Planning**|**Connecting**|**Greening**|**Financing**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|Soviet past|Master plans instead<br>of zoning and central<br>planners instead of<br>urban planners; cities<br>built around<br>industrial areas and<br>land misallocated|Hierarchical structure<br>oriented toward<br>Moscow, with limited<br>horizontal links<br>among lower order<br>centers|Cost of externalities<br>not considered in<br>public policies; broad<br>access to public<br>transport; high rates<br>of access to water<br>and sanitation;<br>recycling programs|System based on plan<br>targets and intra-party<br>negotiations; tariffs<br>highly subsidized|
|Transitional<br>present|High ownership rates<br>and weak rental<br>markets, with<br>misallocated housing<br>stock and missing or<br>poorly enforced city<br>planning regulations|Institutions<br>established to<br>manage connectivity<br>infrastructure and<br>develop sector plans,<br>but progress moving<br>at different pace<br>across the region|Reduced pollution as<br>firms went bankrupt;<br>collapse of recycling<br>systems; deterioration<br>of public transit|Move to modern<br>subnational finance<br>with transparent<br>systems of revenue<br>sharing and equalization<br>transfers, with some<br>countries moving faster<br>than others|
|Market future|Collaborating<br>between local and<br>central government to<br>solve property issues,<br>modernize land use<br>regulations, and use<br>public infrastructure<br>development<br>strategically|Promoting a few<br>cities well connected<br>to world markets by<br>road, rail, air, and<br>telecommunication<br>links; developing<br>regional institutions<br>for corridor<br>management and<br>interstate cooperation<br>on connectivity<br>issues|Preserving positive<br>features of the former<br>Soviet Union;<br>enforcing existing<br>regulations;<br>improving livability<br>by building cities for<br>people and taking<br>care of the<br>environment|Increasing personal<br>income tax rates;<br>enforcing payment of<br>housing maintenance<br>fees; increasing water<br>tariffs; expanding<br>metering and raising of<br>public transport tariffs;<br>for big cities, exploring<br>public-private<br>partnerships for large<br>connectivity projects|

_Source:_ “Eurasian Cities: New Realities along the Silk Road” (2012).

# **Conclusion**

Looking ahead, three interrelated policy instruments are required to ensure the full participation of Eurasian cities in world markets:

- _Develop institutions to help integrate these cities into the world economy._ The most propitious change would be the accession to the WTO of the Eurasian countries that are not yet members, not just for the trade benefits but also for the related domestic economic and judicial reforms. Beyond that are opportunities to build institutions to improve the investment climate, strengthen the rule of law, and make national borders easier to penetrate by reducing trade barriers.

- _Improve infrastructure to connect to world markets._ Eurasia’s trade facilities were built primarily around natural resource exports and intra-regional trade. With the reorientation of markets, imports and exports can be facilitated by improving the infrastructure for integration with the EU, China, and India. Such improvements include seaport and airport development, construction of roads to Western Europe, and development of transshipment options through the Black Sea and Far East.

20