215 However, this is equivalent to a moderate decrease of USD 9,284 million in comparison with SC1 The main contributor to the increase is the growth in energy exports, especially of oil and coal, whi[.]
215 However, this is equivalent to a moderate decrease of USD 9,284 million in comparison with SC1 The main contributor to the increase is the growth in energy exports, especially of oil and coal, which constitute up to 70% of export growth The energy-centric approach policy in SC2 is aimed at enhancing energy efficiency and production capacity in concert with the promotion of renewable energy and attracting additional investment from private participation Therefore, compared with SC1 BAU, the country would export fewer energy resources, especially primary energy demand, to meet the increasing domestic demand for expanding power capacity generation As a result, the trade balance in SC2 would experience marginal deterioration of 1.3% per year, on average, in comparison with SC1 Despite this, the highest investment efficiency in the energy sector in SC2 would, accordingly, expand energy output and, hence, significantly improve energy import dependency, positively contributing to the improvement in the country’s trade balance in general Figure 6-35: Changes 8n Trade Balance in 2030, compared with SC1-BAU Source: Estimates based on modelling developed in this research In the SC3 Food scenario, the country is likely to experience moderate improvement in the trade balance with an average annual increase of 23% during 2014–2030, reaching USD 37,456.2 million (10.8% of GDP) in 2030 This is equivalent to a decrease of USD 7,198 million and an increase of USD 2,086 million in comparison with SC1, and SC2, respectively These changes are due mainly to the food-centric policy approach of SC3, where effective investment in food sectors, applying new technologies in food processing and the whole crop supply chain, would result in higher food production capacity and