Priorities of Russian state economic policy in 2011-2013

Basic strategic objectives (priorities) of state economic policy for the medium term (2011-2013) were formulated by President D. Medvedev in the budget message for 2011-2013.

Economic and budget policy, as its component part, should be aimed at carrying out a comprehensive modernization of the economy, creating conditions for increasing its efficiency and competitiveness, long-term sustainable development, improving the investment climate, and achieving specific results.

Based on this, it is necessary to solve the following problems.

First. Security macroeconomic stability , which includes, among other things, a balanced budget, a consistent reduction in the budget deficit, predictable inflation parameters, and a reduction in the size of the budget deficit.

In the medium term, it is necessary to limit the use of oil and gas revenues, focusing on ensuring a balanced federal budget with reasonable forecast estimates of the cost of oil.

Second. Coordination long-term strategic and budget planning.

It is necessary to soberly assess the priority of strategic tasks, comparing them with real opportunities. Only an integrated approach to making strategic decisions that fully takes into account the lessons of the crisis, new internal and external conditions for the development of the Russian economy, will make it possible to redistribute resources in favor of effective directions of public policy.

We need clear rules for assessing the volume of existing expenditure obligations and procedures for accepting new expenditure obligations, providing for increased responsibility for the reliability of their financial and economic justification.

Any proposed new solution must be analyzed from the point of view of its financial support and contribution to achieving the strategic development goals of the country.

Third. Ensuring that the budget system is focused on achieving concrete results .

The Government of the Russian Federation has created a set of interrelated measures to improve the efficiency of the entire public administration system. Changes in the legal status of state and municipal institutions are aimed at increasing the accessibility and quality of state and municipal services (to implement these measures, Order No. 1021-dated June 10, 2011 approved the “Concept for reducing administrative barriers and increasing the accessibility of state and municipal services for 2011 - 2013").

The practical implementation of these decisions will make it possible to avoid paying only for the very fact of the institution’s existence, regardless of the results of its work.

Fourth. Development and implementation of tools innovation support .

In the coming years, it is necessary to ensure an integrated approach to the formation of the innovation system and the investment environment as a whole, to create conditions for the full cycle of innovation development, including by ensuring macroeconomic stability, protecting competition and property rights, and eliminating administrative barriers.

It is necessary to develop and implement in practice specific mechanisms for introducing and supporting innovative technologies, primarily within the framework of projects in such areas as energy efficiency, medical technology and pharmaceuticals, space and telecommunications, nuclear technologies, strategic computer technologies and software.

To increase the competitiveness of Russian products on the foreign market, it is necessary to actively use the potential of trade missions, improve the system of providing export credit, export insurance and government guarantees. First of all, this concerns the export of products from high-tech industries, nuclear and power engineering, as well as military equipment.

Fifth. Improving quality human capital .

No modernization is possible without qualified specialists, talented scientists, without quality education and constant professional training. It is necessary to strive to grow the scientific potential of our country, accumulate intellectual property, ensure, for these purposes, the continuity of generations in the field of scientific research and technological development, attract and retain young people in it.

In addition to developing our own scientific schools, attention should be paid to attracting highly qualified foreign specialists, as well as promoting the qualifications of Russian specialists in foreign educational institutions.

Serious attention should be paid to both education and improving the health of citizens, creating a healthy lifestyle, and creating conditions for increasing labor and creative activity.

Every year, each state is assigned certain economic tasks. First of all, they depend on the qualities of a market economy. The democratic system of government has many disadvantages. This requires timely intervention in the state's economy. This intervention has now undergone a major reorientation. Let's consider what the priorities of the Russian state's economic policy are. We will also try to find answers to the question on what the well-being of citizens and the country as a whole depends.

Socio-economic policy of Russia and its main directions

The state has a significant influence on the economic development of society. Lack of regulation can lead to serious negative consequences. The main function of the state in the country's economy is to use all existing opportunities to ensure economic development. This significantly increases the efficiency of the economy. The state's interest is to ensure the legal reliability of socio-economic activities. This is necessary in order to fully benefit from its results. There are a number of negative aspects in the economy of the Russian Federation, which the socio-economic policy of the Russian Federation is designed to eliminate. These include:

• The inability of a market economy to conserve limited resources.
• Failure to adequately protect the environment from the negative consequences of human activity.
• Lack of regulations governing the use of limited resources available to nature.
• Lack of incentives to create public goods and services (road construction, etc.).
• Lack of responsibility for the consequences of government decisions.
• Inability to guarantee citizens' rights to work.
• Orientation of the economy to meet the needs of those segments of the population who are willing to pay for goods and services.
• Instability of the country's development.

The need for the state to carry out socio-economic policy

Since the scale of production increases every year, there is a need for constant global investment injections into the economy. Even the largest domestic enterprises cannot do this. That is why it is extremely important to keep the country’s economy under political control. In the Russian Federation there are currently many enterprises whose activities are controlled by the state. They cannot in any way be transferred to private business. When managing the economy, the state pursues exclusively global goals. This ensures that the macroeconomic balance is maintained at the proper level. In addition, social production is guaranteed, which private business will never provide.

Government policy goals and priorities may change. First of all, they are determined by the features of the country’s economic development in a given period of time. Therefore, correct goal setting is extremely important for the Russian state. This determines its further development.

The Government of the Russian Federation sets itself the following priorities:

• Providing support for the state’s financial system, creating its resistance to various factors, reducing inflation.
• Taking measures to increase the flow of investment into the country, reducing pressure on private entrepreneurs, and creating competition.
• Maintaining the proper level of social development, directing investments in human capital.
• Improving innovative sectors of the economy.
• Improving the defense complex.
• Ensuring balanced development of regions.
• Economic diversification.
• Adaptation of the Russian economy in accordance with the requirements of the WTO.

Long-term economic development plan

To ensure the economic growth of the state, it is extremely important to formulate a long-term plan for economic development, as this helps to determine what the policy priorities of the Russian state are in the economy.

The concept providing for measures for the socio-economic development of the state until 2020 is established in the relevant order. The main priorities that it enshrines are:

• Improving the well-being of Russian citizens.
• Taking measures to improve the level of national security of the country.
• High dynamics of economic development.
• Strengthening the position occupied by the Russian Federation in the world market.

Ensuring the normal development of the state is facilitated by the goals that are set for the Russian government when determining its policy. Strict adherence to these goals will ensure positive dynamics in the development of the state. The following main goals of economic policy can be identified:

• Formation of the most relevant structure of social production.
• Stimulating an increase in production volume.
• Ensuring maximum employment of the population.
• Proper distribution of income.
• Maintaining stable prices in the market and creating a flexible pricing policy.
• Reducing the negative consequences of inflation.
• Ensuring the safety of natural resources.

Achieving these goals will increase the level of development of the Russian economy, on which the wealth and prosperity of the country depends. However, in this situation, certain contradictions may appear. For example, increasing production volumes can lead to environmental degradation. That is why it is extremely important to determine what the priorities of the Russian state’s economic policy are. This will help eliminate contradictions between goals and help develop the correct methodology for governing the state.

Measures to implement the directions established by the socio-economic policy of Russia

Conducting a review of programs approved by the state, which will help bring them into line with the financial capabilities of the state.

Approval of “road maps” that will help improve business conditions.

Taking measures to improve tax administration, which will help reduce the tax burden on business and attract additional funds for the development of domestic entrepreneurship as investments.

Development of proposals to promote the development of single-industry towns in the complex, liquidation of emergency housing stock.

Taking measures to improve the state debt policy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

It is necessary to improve the employment law.

Forming more cohesive inter-budgetary relations.

Acceleration of the process of adoption of federal laws.

The main strategic objectives that are set for the economic policy of the state

Achieving macroeconomic stability.

Coordination of strategic and budget planning.

Ensure innovation is maintained.

Improving the quality of human capital.

Let's take a closer look at them.

Ensuring macroeconomic stability as one of the main goals of economic policy

This goal involves the creation of a balanced budget, a gradual annual reduction of the budget deficit and minimizing it, and the ability to predict inflation parameters.

In the future, it is planned to limit the use of revenues from oil and gas production, ensuring a balanced budget of the Russian Federation with reasonable forecast indicators for the cost of oil.

Measures to ensure coordination of budgetary and strategic planning in the long term

The strategic objectives of the state must be assessed in accordance with priorities. To do this, they should be compared with the existing real opportunities, on which the wealth and prosperity of the country depends. Only the use of an integrated approach, taking into account all past problems, will make it possible to effectively distribute state resources across areas of economic policy.

Moreover, any decision should be made only after a preliminary analysis of the possibilities of its financial support and how it will affect the achievement of the main strategic goals that the state faces.

Development and implementation of tools necessary to support innovation

The state must necessarily take an integrated approach when creating a favorable investment environment. To do this, it is necessary to ensure macroeconomic stability in the country, increase the competitiveness of domestic products, and also eliminate existing administrative barriers.

Improving the quality of human capital

When implementing modernization, the availability of qualified specialists is extremely important, and therefore the state must pay attention to the quality of education and control the conduct of vocational training.

In addition to education, it is necessary to improve the system of domestic scientific schools and attract foreign specialists to the training process. It is also necessary to direct efforts to create decent working conditions and increase productivity; for this, a number of amendments should be made to the Law on Employment.

Thus, the main priorities of Russia's economic policy are determined by the specifics of the transition period to a new innovative level, which is oriented towards social needs. In order for the Russian state to enter a new stage of development, it is necessary to establish the correct long-term goals and priorities that will determine the entire necessary set of transformations in the state’s economy.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Ural State Economic University"

Center for Distance Education

Test

by discipline: State regulation of the economy

Ekaterinburg

1. Classical direction (A. Smith): defining the role of the State in the economy

2. Fiscal policy

3. Priorities of Russian state economic policy

1. Classical direction (A.Smith): determinedthe role of the state in the economy

Scottish economist A. Smith is considered by many to be the first great economist. A. Smith received such recognition due to the fact that his book “The Wealth of Nations” is the first work in the history of economic science in which its systematic presentation was given. According to M. Blaug, economic works before A. Smith are “dress rehearsals for science, but not yet science itself.”

A. Smith's research methodology is similar to that of the physiocrats. The basis of the universe is a certain “internal”, “natural order”, which creates harmony between the individual actions of free individuals independent of each other.

But at the same time, his methodology contains elements of novelty associated with the concepts of “economic man” and “invisible hand”; these concepts later became the foundation of the main direction of modern economic science (transformed accordingly into the principles of rationality and equilibrium).

According to the concept " economic man", each individual, when carrying out his actions, is guided by personal interests and strives for maximum benefit for himself. Thus, every person is an "economic man." A. Smith characterizes the behavior of an economic person as follows:

“He is more likely to achieve his goal if he appeals to their selfishness and manages to show them that it is in their own interests to do for him what he requires of them. Anyone who offers another a transaction of any kind is offering to do just that. Give me what I need, and you will get what you need - this is the meaning of any such proposal."

According to the concept "invisible hands", the behavior of individuals who behave in accordance with the concept of "economic man" ultimately results in the greatest possible social welfare. Its maximization is achieved with unlimited freedom of market activity. A. Smith does not directly define the “invisible hand”, mentioning it casually, arguing that the individual “... pursues only his own benefit, and... he is guided by an invisible hand towards a goal that was not at all part of his intentions ; Moreover, society does not always suffer from the fact that this goal was not part of its intentions. In pursuing his own interests he often serves the interests of society more effectively than when he consciously seeks to serve them.”

Already from the title of A. Smith's main work it follows that the main object of his interests is wealth. This entire book is dedicated to identifying the factors that promote or hinder the accumulation of wealth.

According to A. Smith, wealth is the value of material goods (“necessaries of life and convenience”) in the hands of the nation (people). Wealth consists of the products of the labor of the people of a given country and the products of the labor of other peoples acquired in exchange for the wealth of the nation. The purpose of economics is to study how the maximum wealth of a nation can be achieved.

Among the main factors of wealth, A. Smith identifies the following.

a) Division of labor.

b) Capital accumulation.

c) Government intervention in the economy.

The first two factors influence wealth positively, the third - negatively. The entire further structure of A. Smith’s book is directly or indirectly “adapted” to the analysis of these factors. And first of all, A. Smith is interested in the first factor of wealth - the division of labor.

The division of labor represents its differentiation; identification and existence of various types of labor activity. In a technical sense, it is the division of work activity into many functions and operations within one enterprise. A. Smith describes in detail this division and the benefits it brings. According to the concept of the classic, the division of labor makes it possible to increase its productivity and, thereby, increase the wealth of the nation.

What gives rise to the division of labor? According to A. Smith, it is the result of people’s natural inclination to exchange and trade (arising from their behavior in accordance with the concept of “economic man”). The degree of division of labor is determined by the possibilities of exchange, the determinants of which are the development of communication routes and the size of the market. These dimensions are used to the fullest when money is used. smith wealth state budget

According to the views of A. Smith, money arises in the process of exchange. He defines them as "the great wheel of circulation." At the same time, he considers money only as a means of exchange, without taking into account its function as a store of value. Moreover, the use of money only allows the maximum use of the size of the market - and therefore, the division of labor itself only allows increasing the wealth of the nation - when the exchange of goods for money is carried out “correctly”. To understand in which case an exchange is “right”, it is necessary to turn to Smith’s theory of value.

Any product, according to A. Smith’s concept, has two types of value. On the one hand, it brings certain benefits to its owner when he consumes it. Thus, we can talk about “value in use.” On the other hand, each given product can be exchanged for another product. Therefore, we can talk about its “value in exchange.”

At the same time, A. Smith notes that a product that has a high “value in use” may have little “value in exchange,” and vice versa. He writes about the “paradox of diamond and water”: water is a basic necessity (without it people would die of thirst), but at the same time it is extremely cheap; on the other hand, diamond does not satisfy the most important needs of people, and at the same time it is very expensive. Not knowing how to resolve this paradox (only marginalists managed to do this), A. Smith concentrates his attention exclusively on “value in exchange”, i.e. exchange value or price. What does the exchange value (price) of a product depend on?

A. Smith notes that its determinants are the labor costs for its production. Thus, goods are exchanged for each other (through money) in proportions corresponding to the ratio of labor time spent on their production. Thus, he is the founder of the labor theory of value.

But then he adds that the prices of goods are determined by the input of labor only in societies in the early stages of their development, in which the volume of use of capital and land is negligible. In a developed capitalist system, contemporary to A. Smith, the price of a single product is the sum of the income of the owners of production factors used in the process of its production. In other words, price is the sum of wages (the income of the owner of labor), profit (the income of the owner of capital) and rent (the income of the owner of land). Thus, A. Smith is also the founder of another theory of value - the theory of factors of production.

Further, A. Smith distinguishes two types of product prices - “natural price” and “market price”. Natural price is the “normal” value of the exchange value of a product. It is equal to the sum of wages, profits and rents that are usual or average (“natural”) in a given area and at a given time. “When the price of any commodity is neither more nor less than what is sufficient to pay, according to their natural rates, the rent of land, the remuneration of labor, and the profit on the capital employed in the extraction, processing, and delivery of that commodity to the market, it sold at its natural price." According to A. Smith, the natural price of a product is the center of gravity of the market (i.e. actual) price. In other words, the market price tends to the natural price. If, for example, the market price turns out to be less than the natural price, then the owners of the factors of production are, as it were, “underpaid”, as a result of which they begin to leave the given area and/or industry, the supply of goods is reduced, and its price rises to the level of the natural price. Conversely, the excess of the market price over the natural one leads to an influx of new resource owners into a given area and/or industry, and the price decreases to the natural level. Thus, the division of labor then leads to an increase in the wealth of the nation when the exchange of goods occurs at “natural prices.”

All this indicates that the question of the natural price is closely connected with the question of the factors influencing wages, profit and rent.

According to A. Smith, the income of production factors is determined primarily by the accumulated capital stock of entrepreneurs. The greater the stock of capital, the greater the product produced by labor and land, and, accordingly, the greater the wages and rent. This is due to the fact that the greater the capital, the greater the amount the entrepreneur can allocate to pay for the activities of these factors of production. It is clear that wages are directly dependent on the capital stock. It is also necessary to take into account that the lower limit of wages forms what is now called the subsistence minimum - the funds necessary to satisfy the physiological needs of the worker and non-working members of his family. Profit, on the other hand, is inversely related to the capital stock. This raises the question of the factors influencing the accumulation of capital, especially since it is one of the determinants of the wealth of a nation.

Capital is a stock of goods or money from the use of which their owner expects to receive income. Depending on the duration of use, capital is divided into fixed capital (circulated over several production cycles, i.e. its value is transferred to the cost of the manufactured product in parts) and circulating capital (circulated during one production cycle, i.e. its value is transferred to the cost of the manufactured product immediately, completely). Fixed capital includes machinery and equipment; building and structures that generate income; improving land quality; acquiring and improving the skills of workers (the latter type in the 20th century will be called human capital).

A. Smith identifies two most important factors in capital accumulation. The first factor is frugality. “Thrift, and not industry, is the immediate cause of the increase of capital.” Thus, following A. Turgot, A. Smith believes that frugality automatically leads to investment and, thereby, contributes to economic growth. Thus, we can talk about the Turgot-Smith concept of growth. The second factor is the share of workers engaged in productive work. To understand the meaning of this factor, it is necessary to turn to Smith's theory of productive labor.

Productive labor is any labor involved in the production of material goods. Accordingly, the labor used to provide services is unproductive. Here we should remember the theory of wealth. A. Smith includes only material goods in wealth. This is why, according to A. Smith, an increase in the share of workers engaged in productive labor gives rise to an increase in the wealth of the nation.

It should be noted that Smith's theory of productive labor was the basis of the national accounting system of the USSR. This led to statistical distortions in the economic development of the Soviet Union and the underdevelopment of the service sector.

As already noted, A. Smith generally has a negative attitude towards government intervention in the economy, believing that it negatively affects the growth of the wealth of nations. This attitude on his part is due to the fact that, in his opinion, the state, through its actions, leads to deviations of market prices of goods from their natural prices. However, it would be a mistake to believe that he denies any economic role of the state at all. He identifies three types of government interventions that are necessary for a market economy because they promote capital accumulation.

a) Expenses for public works.

b) Expenses for maintaining military security.

c) Costs of providing and maintaining the legal system.

This is what the government should do in the economy. Any types of his activities that go beyond the described framework cause harm to the economy. Thus, here too A. Smith continues the traditions of the physiocrats, consistently acting as an ideologist of economic liberalism.

2. Fiscal policy

Objectives of budget policy:

1. Improving the legal regulation of the budget process.

The main innovation of the budget legislation of the coming period will be the preparation of a new edition of the Budget Code, which should summarize the results of the budget reforms, consolidate into a single system numerous adopted federal laws and draft laws on amendments to the Budget Code.

The new edition of the Budget Code should be more resistant to changes, understandable and easy to use.

The new edition of the Budget Code will provide for:

expansion of the subject of the Budget Code in terms of regulation of certain issues in relation to “non-participants” of the budget process (budgetary and autonomous institutions, unitary enterprises, state corporations and companies);

improving the methodology for the formation and execution of expenditure obligations to more clearly determine the volume and structure of the state’s current obligations and planning financial resources for their implementation;

elimination of excessive detail and duplication of provisions of the Budget Code (for example, refusal to preserve the lists of budgetary powers of the Ministry of Finance of Russia and the Federal Treasury);

the introduction of norms establishing the possibility of redistribution by regions in favor of local budgets of certain non-tax revenues, which will allow additional revenues to be directed to local budgets through inter-budgetary regulation and increase their financial security;

clarifying the forms of interbudgetary transfers, including the introduction of subsidies in order to ensure budget balance, “horizontal interbudgetary transfers”, limiting the scope of interbudgetary transfers, tightening requirements for the distribution of subsidies exclusively by laws (decisions) on the budget;

changing the principles of distribution of income from fines, since the current distribution does not have a unified methodology;

establishing requirements for the revenue forecasting methodology, as well as the corresponding budgetary powers of budget revenue administrators;

provision of federal budget funds to the authorized capital and authorized funds of legal entities, subsidies to legal entities within the amount of actual need;

ensuring an assessment of the magnitude and dynamics of tax preferences provided by the state ("tax expenses"), determining the effectiveness of established tax benefits that should be provided for a limited period;

formation of a legal basis for the system of budget payments (including issues of the functioning of its participants, forms of payment and principles of making payments), which will allow:

reduce operating costs associated with the implementation of the budget process, expand payment services, increase the accessibility and comfort of paying for state and municipal services;

ensure the transition from cash to treasury servicing of budget execution using a single treasury account in order to increase the efficiency of distribution of revenues between the budgets of the budget system of the Russian Federation and management of cash balances of the budgets of the budget system of the Russian Federation;

expand opportunities for managing free balances of budget funds, which will increase the liquidity of the single budget account and the profitability of operations from managing them;

clarification of the composition of documents and materials submitted simultaneously with the draft budget (inclusion of the main directions of debt policy, exclusion from the federal list of documents that are essentially information bases and to which constant access can be provided, for example, a register of expenditure obligations);

establishing the legal basis for the preparation of state financial reporting, including data on the public sector and the general government sector;

development of provisions on information systems.

It is assumed that changes to the Budget Code should come into force on January 1, 2016 and be applied starting with the formation of draft budgets for 2016 and the planning period of 2017 and 2018.

In order to ensure budget balance, it is necessary to take measures aimed at increasing budget revenues of the budget system of the Russian Federation.

In order to improve the rules for differentiating the degree of budgetary independence of government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local self-government bodies and to establish dependence exclusively on the share of subsidies in the budget revenues of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities, a draft federal law "On Amendments to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation in connection with improvement of interbudgetary relations and the procedure for changing certain provisions of Articles 104, 104.1, 130 and 136 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation until 2016."

The changes provide for the establishment of restrictions depending on the share of subsidies in the own revenues of the consolidated budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local budgets, and not on the share of all interbudgetary transfers to the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities currently used in calculations (with the exception of subventions and certain types of financial support) in the revenues of the corresponding budgets.

For the constituent entities of the Russian Federation that are recipients of subsidies to equalize the budgetary provision of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, restrictions will be established on the implementation of external borrowing on international capital markets and cash services for the execution of regional budgets by the executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

The proposed approach to setting restrictions also provides for a change in the shares of interbudgetary transfers from 20 to 10% and from 60 to 40%, which affect the degree of budgetary independence of government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

Also, in order to create conditions at the legislative level for solving the problem in the field of financial relations between the federal and regional budgets, it is advisable to include in the draft new edition of the Budget Code provisions according to which the distribution of subsidies between the constituent entities of the Russian Federation is approved by the federal law on the federal budget for the next financial year and the planned one. period.

To prepare reports on the execution of the consolidated budget of an urban district with intra-city division, it is planned to introduce amendments to the Budget Code, which will come into force in 2015 and are aimed at ensuring the balance of local budgets in the new conditions, as well as clarifying the existing norms and rules of interbudgetary regulation at the regional and municipal level. levels.

It is envisaged to clarify the amounts of deductions from federal taxes and fees to the budgets of municipal districts and rural settlements, as well as to establish standards for deductions from taxes and fees to the budgets of newly formed urban districts with intracity districts and intracity districts located on their territory.

2. Improving the quality of government programs and expanding their use in budget planning.

Further implementation of the principle of forming budgets on the basis of state (municipal) programs will increase the validity of budget allocations at the stage of their formation, ensure their greater transparency for society and the availability of greater opportunities for assessing their effectiveness.

State programs should more fully reflect the complex of measures and instruments of state policy, thereby increasing their quality as strategic planning documents. It is important to ensure further integration of state programs into the budget planning process, including regulating the process of allocating additional resources, linking it with the achievement of the goals and results of the relevant state programs. At the same time, the need to exercise powers under conditions of strict financial restrictions requires expanding the powers of the main managers of federal budget funds to redistribute funds within programs.

In terms of improving the methodology for the formation of state programs, it is planned to carry out:

full reflection and consideration of the impact on target indicators when forming government programs of all government policy instruments - not only budget expenditures, but also the use of tax incentives (tax incentives should be considered as “tax expenses”), tariff regulation measures, regulatory regulation, participation in management state corporations and companies, etc.;

expanding the practice of implementing government program activities on the principles of project management, which presupposes the obligation to justify the choice of forms and mechanisms for the implementation of specific activities (including the possibility of their implementation without the use of federal budget funds or the feasibility of using public-private partnership mechanisms);

finalizing the requirements for the target indicators of government programs used, since in most cases they do not allow assessing the real results of the development of the relevant industry as a whole and are not linked to the strategic development goals of the country;

refinement of methods for assessing the effectiveness of government programs;

the introduction of mandatory adjustments to government programs that have low efficiency ratings at the end of the reporting year, as well as a procedure for taking into account the results of efficiency evaluation when forming a draft budget and clarifying cost estimates for the longer term.

In order to integrate the processes of budget formation and state programs, it is necessary to ensure the simultaneous submission to the State Duma of the draft federal budget for the next financial year and planning period and draft amendments to state programs.

Finalizing the decision-making procedure that determines the composition and volume of budget expenditures involves:

unity of methodological approaches to planning current and capital expenditures, rejection of a special (separate) approach to planning investment expenditures;

joint consideration at the planning stage of investment and subsequent associated current and operating costs;

consideration of proposals for new facilities only if the state program has resources sufficient to maintain existing and commissioned facilities;

inclusion of budgetary allocations for investments in the budget only if approved project documentation is available;

refusal to approve new federal target programs and inclusion of activities of existing federal target programs in the corresponding state programs;

formation of long-term budget forecasts containing a forecast of the main characteristics of the budget for the long term, including maximum expenditures for the implementation of government programs;

rejection of the practice of making one-time decisions and instructions, including those involving the allocation of budgetary allocations from the federal budget, linking the adoption and execution of such decisions with the achievement of the goals and results of the relevant government programs;

execution of all decisions within the approved maximum expenditures for the implementation of state programs (if, within the framework of a state program, the responsible executive does not find reserves for implementing the decision, he must initiate an adjustment or cancellation of such a decision);

expanding the powers of responsible executors of state programs to redistribute funds between the activities of state programs;

reducing the number of co-executors and participants in government programs by transferring appropriations to federal executive authorities responsible for developing state policy and legal regulation in the relevant area.

3. Reducing the dependence of the budgets of state extra-budgetary funds of the Russian Federation on transfers from the federal budget.

In accordance with certain provisions of Federal Law N 400-FZ, Federal Laws of December 28, 2013 N 424-FZ “On Cumulative Pension”, N 421-FZ “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation in Connection with the Adoption of the Federal Law “On a special assessment of working conditions” (hereinafter referred to as Federal Law N 421-FZ) provides for the implementation of certain measures aimed at reducing the dependence of the budget of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation on federal budget transfers.

a gradual increase in the base for calculating insurance premiums from 160% of the nominally accrued average monthly salary to 230%;

encouraging later assignment of labor pensions;

clarification of the requirements for the minimum insurance period (from 5 to 15 years).

It also provides for a change in the mechanism of preferences for the payment of insurance premiums to the budgets of state extra-budgetary funds of the Russian Federation by certain categories of policyholders so that after the expiration of such preferences (if it is necessary to support certain sectors of the economy), state support measures are provided that do not affect the compulsory social insurance system.

In addition, in 2014 - 2015 it is planned to study the feasibility of transferring the administration of insurance premiums from state extra-budgetary funds to the Federal Tax Service of Russia.

4. Increasing the efficiency of financial relationships with the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local budgets.

The basis for increasing the efficiency of providing interbudgetary transfers is to improve the structure and procedure for their provision, as well as the formation of the volumes of these transfers based on the need to solve priority problems of socio-economic development.

Stability and predictability of interbudgetary regulation is the basis for increasing the efficiency of the use of interbudgetary transfers. Based on this, the draft federal budget for 2015 - 2017 will ensure the maximum distribution of interbudgetary transfers among the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

To maintain the level of financial support for constituent entities of the Russian Federation with a relatively low level of per capita tax and non-tax revenues within the planning period, it is planned to increase, taking into account the rate of inflation, the total volume of subsidies provided to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to equalize budgetary security.

It is planned to continue work on consolidating subsidies allocated to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation from the federal budget within the framework of state programs.

At the same time, subsidies for co-financing of specific regional and municipal facilities will be provided only on the condition that they are necessary for the functioning of federal property. In order to co-finance other facilities, it is planned to provide a single (comprehensive) subsidy within the framework of state programs, control over the use of which does not provide for the inclusion of regional and municipal facilities in the federal targeted investment program.

After completion of these activities (in the medium term), it is necessary to abandon further changes in the methodology and approaches to the formation, distribution and provision of interbudgetary transfers, adjustments in the distribution of powers between levels of public authority, changes in tax legislation, which will allow government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments realize the advantages of long-term budget planning and the program-target method at a qualitatively new level.

In the context of a significant increase in the volume of state and municipal debt, the main task of providing budget loans will change.

Reducing the level of debt burden of regional and local budgets, in particular, will be facilitated by replacing commercial loans from constituent entities of the Russian Federation with budget loans from the federal budget while simultaneously reducing fees for using budget loans. At the same time, as conditions for granting loans, additional requirements will be used to limit the increase in other borrowings (with the exception of loans for restructuring accumulated debt), optimize the structure and volume of expenditure obligations, and implement an effective revenue administration policy.

5. Increasing the efficiency of providing state (municipal) services.

As part of solving this problem, work will continue to create incentives for a more rational and economical use of budget funds (including when placing orders and fulfilling obligations), and reducing the share of ineffective budget expenditures.

The use of the instrument of state (municipal) assignment for the provision of state (municipal) services in strategic and budget planning will ensure the interconnection of state programs and state assignments in order to create conditions for achieving the goals of state policy in relevant areas and increasing the efficiency of institutions to meet the needs of citizens and society in state and municipal services.

At the same time, summary indicators of state assignments will be included in the indicators of state programs (subprograms), and the parameters of state assignments will be formed in accordance with the goals and expected results of the relevant state programs.

It is also necessary to provide for linking the composition and volume of state (municipal) services (work) with social guarantees and obligations of the state.

The process of developing a transparent methodology for determining the cost of state (municipal) services will be completed by introducing unified (group) values ​​of cost standards for the formation of subsidies for financial support for the implementation of state (municipal) tasks.

It is necessary to continue work on optimizing the structure of the budget network through the liquidation or transformation of state (municipal) institutions that do not provide services directly aimed at implementing the powers of state authorities and local governments, as well as those that do not correspond to the profile of the body exercising the functions and powers of the founder in the organization other organizational and legal form. For this purpose, it is envisaged to develop the basis for making decisions on the advisability of maintaining, reorganizing, changing the type or liquidating state institutions.

During the planning period, the formation of a unified list of state and municipal services and works will be completed on the basis of basic (sectoral) lists of state and municipal services and works developed by federal executive authorities, which will be valid for all public legal entities.

At the same time, a unified list of state and municipal services and works should become the basis for the formation of departmental lists of state (municipal) services and works.

Improving the quality of state (municipal) services (works) is also expected to be achieved by creating an appropriate regulatory framework regulating the involvement of non-governmental organizations in the provision of state (municipal) services (works) through the introduction of competitive placement of state (municipal) orders for the provision of state (municipal) services. services with the participation of non-governmental organizations and the full application of the principles of “effective contract” in state (municipal) institutions.

6. Optimization of labor costs.

As part of the implementation of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation "On the main directions for improving the public administration system" dated May 7, 2012 N 601, it is proposed to ensure the improvement of the remuneration system for civil servants by increasing the material incentive fund in the period 2015 - 2016, and starting from 2017 - with changes in the structure of the wage fund, in which the share of incentive payments will be 40%, while simultaneously increasing the wage fund by 2.48 times.

In addition, it is planned to optimize budget expenditures on wages, including taking into account the reduction in the number of civil servants and employees of federal government bodies filling positions that are not positions in the federal public civil service, carried out in conjunction with the optimization of the functions of federal government bodies (redistribution of functions , transfer of powers to government bodies of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation, elimination of duplicating functions, specialization of functions, etc.).

In 2017, financial support for remuneration costs for employees of federal government bodies is planned to be carried out based on the actual number, taking into account the limitation of funding for vacant positions to no more than 10% of the established number. This approach will optimize the costs of maintaining federal government agencies.

At the same time, in the event of an increase in the actual number (within the limits of the staffing level) during the financial year, the main managers of federal budget funds will be provided with additional budgetary allocations for remuneration of employees from the funds of a reserve specially created for these purposes.

Since 2017, in the context of an increase in the level of remuneration of civil servants, it is planned to reduce the duration of vacations in the state civil service.

In addition, the transition to the full-scale application of the principles of “effective contract” in relation to each employee in state (municipal) institutions will be completed, based on the need to increase wages depending on the quality and quantity of work performed.

7. Removing restrictions on transport infrastructure.

Budgetary policy in the field of transport and road infrastructure will be carried out taking into account:

priority for the implementation of large investment projects in the development of transport infrastructure, which have a significant multiplier effect by reducing transport costs and giving an additional impetus to the development of related sectors of the economy, including the construction of seaport facilities in the area of ​​​​the village of Sabetta, the Moscow - St. Petersburg expressway , the Central Ring Road, projects for the development of the railway infrastructure of the Moscow transport hub, the Baikal-Amur and Trans-Siberian railways, railway infrastructure on the Mezhdurechensk - Taishet section, the development of airports of the Moscow aviation hub;

reducing the volume of support for railway transport, including passenger transportation in suburban services and long-distance trains, while maintaining the financial stability of the open joint-stock company "Russian Railways" by establishing long-term tariff regulation at a level that ensures break-even of the company's activities and the implementation of its long-term investment program in the necessary volumes, the establishment of long-term relations between the open joint-stock company "Russian Railways" and the Russian Federation on the current maintenance and development of railway infrastructure on the basis of a network contract for guaranteed transport provision of infrastructure services, as well as the organization of passenger transportation on the basis of state orders;

ensuring a phased transition to the standard maintenance of inland waterways and navigable hydraulic structures in order to increase the level of safety of navigation of vessels on inland waterways, as well as the level of safety of navigable hydraulic structures; increasing the accessibility of air transportation, including on socially significant and commercially unprofitable routes, as well as supporting new routes to achieve sustainable passenger traffic on them with the abandonment of government support after achieving profitability.

In addition, for the purpose of sustainable development of the transport industry, in the next financial year and planning period, measures should be implemented to:

mobilization of federal budget revenues related to the development of transport infrastructure, in particular by introducing fees for the use of inland waterway infrastructure (including the approval of relevant standards), as well as ensuring the introduction of a toll system to compensate for damage caused to public roads of federal importance vehicles with a permissible weight of over 12 tons;

optimization of standards for financing road work on federal roads;

conducting an analysis of investment projects with a view to expanding the use of public-private partnership mechanisms (concession, life cycle contract) with the involvement of extra-budgetary sources, including the possibility of introducing payment for the use of transport infrastructure facilities.

8. Increasing the efficiency of spending budget allocations for capital investments.

To increase the efficiency of capital investments, it is necessary to create conditions aimed at reducing the risks of delays in construction, reconstruction, and technical re-equipment of capital construction projects, including due to the length of the procedure for making changes to the federal targeted investment program.

Planning budget allocations for capital investments in the construction of the facility itself should be implemented only if, as of May 1 of the current year, approved project documentation is available (project documentation undergoing state examination).

Reducing the time frame and improving the quality of planning budget allocations for capital investments will be facilitated by an additional restriction on the inclusion of these expenses in the draft budget only if there is an approved decision on capital investments or a draft of such a decision agreed upon with all interested federal executive authorities.

At the same time, when making a decision on capital investments in federally owned objects, only the characteristics of the object (its cost, capacity, commissioning period) will be determined. The right to independently determine the method of financial support (subsidies or investments) will be transferred to the main managers.

In 2015 - 2016, the process of centralizing procurement for major repairs and construction and creating an authorized institution for the majority of federal authorities will be completed.

It is also necessary to reduce (gradually until completely abolished) the practice of advance payments when executing state (municipal) contracts for the construction and reconstruction of capital construction projects.

The main task of budget policy in the field of agriculture for 2015 - 2017 remains the optimization and prioritization of existing expenditure obligations of the federal budget to provide state support for agricultural development, taking into account existing instructions of the President and Government of the Russian Federation. In order to mobilize resources to financially support established industry development priorities, the following should be done:

ensure state assistance in increasing the investment attractiveness of the industry within the framework of subsidizing part of the interest rate on attracted investment loans, taking into account the priority fulfillment of expenditure obligations to subsidize investment loans attracted before January 1, 2013, as well as the performance of seasonal field work by subsidizing part of the interest rate on short-term loans , borrowed from Russian credit institutions;

reduce the number of major activities to support agriculture, concentrating budget resources on the implementation of the most significant areas of support for the Russian agro-industrial complex;

tighten the conditions for interbudgetary transfers provided to the budgets of constituent entities of the Russian Federation for the development of agricultural production;

carry out an inventory of investment projects that are planned to be subsidized through federal budget allocations (in terms of areas of support, categories of budget recipients, etc.), as well as economically significant programs of constituent entities of the Russian Federation for the development of certain sub-sectors of agriculture;

prevent the formation of federal budget obligations that are not covered by budgetary allocations under the powers of state authorities of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation on subjects of joint jurisdiction, carried out by these bodies independently at the expense of the budget of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation (with the exception of subventions from the federal budget) and related to the provision of support for agricultural production.

Maneuvering resources, primarily those provided for in the federal budget for providing unrelated support in crop production and subsidizing one liter (kilogram) of milk, should ensure to the maximum extent the achievement of the main key indicators and indicators of agricultural development approved by the Government of the Russian Federation, as well as the results of the implementation of agricultural politicians.

9. Improving the efficiency of managing public debt and public financial assets.

The implementation of debt policy in 2015 - 2017 will be carried out within the framework of solving key tasks of maintaining a moderate debt burden (the ratio of the public debt of the Russian Federation to GDP not exceeding 15 - 20%) and reducing the cost of servicing public debt (the share in the total expenditures of the federal budget, not exceeding 10%), compliance with the indicators and indicators established by the state program "Public Finance Management and Regulation of Financial Markets", as well as for the development of the internal capital market.

The priority direction of the issuance policy on the domestic capital market in the planned period will be the issue of medium- and long-term government securities. The issue of short-term instruments (up to 1 year) is considered an exceptional measure, the use of which is justified only in conditions of extremely unfavorable market conditions in the absence of funding opportunities through the issue of medium- and long-term government securities. This practice will keep the risks of limiting access to refinancing low, as well as optimize the structure of government internal debt by maturity.

The policy of maintaining high liquidity of the OFZ market will be continued by regularly offering to the market new “benchmark” bond issues with constant coupon rates, large volumes in circulation and redemption at “standard” points of the bond yield curve, that is, 3 - 15 years.

In addition, work will continue to create the prerequisites for the further development of the capital market, in particular, on the transition to active operations for managing public debt for a targeted impact on the volume and structure of debt, including through exchange operations of old issues of government securities with a non-standard structure and low liquidity for new standard issues.

The profitability of placed OFZ issues will be formed under the influence, first of all, of the current needs of the federal budget (supply) and depending on market conditions (demand for bonds), including on the international capital market, taking into account the solution of the strategic task of achieving and maintaining the target duration OFZ portfolio at the level of 5 years.

In the development of the domestic debt market, a number of measures will be taken aimed at:

further infrastructure changes in order to create the most comfortable conditions for investors;

ensuring a regular, time-diversified supply of government bonds, taking into account the corresponding demand and in volumes that meet the needs of the federal budget;

further improvement of the investor base by expanding the range of instruments offered;

increasing the transparency of government borrowing policy, ensuring constant active interaction with the investment community, stimulating an increase in the level of investor confidence in the Russian debt market;

improving the quality of information support for the issuer’s actions and disclosure of information about the state and characteristics of public debt.

In order to maintain Russia's presence as a sovereign borrower in the international capital market and maintain constant access to the resources of these markets, in the period 2015 - 2017 it is planned:

continue the placement of Eurobonds of the Russian Federation in limited volumes, taking into account existing demand and current market conditions;

continue to form a representative yield curve for borrowings by the Russian Federation in various currencies, primarily in US dollars and euros;

create further prerequisites for attracting long-term investors, diversified by type and geography;

improve borrowing conditions in the interests of corporate borrowers;

maintain an ongoing dialogue with a wide range of global investors.

In the field of managing sovereign funds of the Russian Federation in the medium term, the main tasks are:

increasing income from managing the resources of the Reserve Fund and the National Welfare Fund through the implementation of less conservative and more profitable investment strategies that involve conducting transactions with corporate securities with the involvement of professional participants in financial markets;

placement of part of the NWF funds in Russian securities related to the implementation of self-sustaining infrastructure projects that generate sustainable investment income.

3. Priorities of Russian state economic policy

The main strategic directions of state economic policy for the medium term (2014-2016) were formulated by President V. Putin in the Budget Address of the President of the Russian Federation on budget policy in 2014-2016.

According to the president, the situation in the Russian and global economy poses fiscal policy to new challenges. Based on high rates of economic development and rising prices for resources, the model of constant growth of budget expenditures has now exhausted its possibilities.

In modern conditions, solving the problems of increasing the efficiency of expenditures and reorienting budget allocations within the framework of existing budget restrictions for the implementation of priority directions of state policy, carrying out socio-economic transformations aimed at increasing the efficiency of all participants in economic relations, achieving measurable, socially significant results comes to the fore. , the most important of which were established by decrees of the President of the Russian Federation dated May 7, 2012.

In the new macroeconomic realities, it is necessary to solve the following problems.

First. Ensuring long-term balance and sustainability of the budget system as the basic principle of responsible budget policy with the unconditional fulfillment of all state obligations and the fulfillment of the tasks set in the decrees of the President of the Russian Federation of May 7, 2012.

In the context of a reduction in previously predicted revenues, it is necessary to develop algorithms for using various sources of financing in the event of an unpredictable increase in the budget deficit.

The budget strategy should contain clear guidelines for the resource provision of government programs and an assessment of the risks of budget imbalance in various forecast scenarios, as well as a recommended algorithm of actions for their implementation.

Second. Optimizing the structure of federal budget expenditures .

The exhaustion of opportunities for increasing the total volume of federal budget expenditures requires the identification of reserves and redistribution in favor of priority areas and projects, primarily ensuring the solution of the tasks set in the decrees of the President of the Russian Federation of May 7, 2012 and creating conditions for economic growth.

The main reserves currently are :

· ensuring long-term balance of the pension system with a gradual reduction of subsidies to the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation from the federal budget, subject to a consistent increase in the standard of living of pensioners;

· active use of public-private partnership mechanisms to attract investments and services from private companies to solve public problems, as well as investing funds from the National Welfare Fund and pension savings in investment projects, primarily infrastructure, on a repayable basis;

· possible extension of the deadlines for the implementation of certain areas of the State Armament Program for 2011-2020;

· increasing the targeting of social support for citizens;

· carrying out structural reforms in the social sphere;

· increasing the efficiency of budget expenditures in general, including through optimization of public procurement, the budget network and the number of civil servants.

Third. Development of program-targeted management methods .

Similar documents

Basic concepts, problems and directions of state regional policy of the Russian Federation, priorities and principles on which it is based. Features of the regional policy of the Novosibirsk region, further prospects for its development.

course work, added 09/07/2010


Characteristics of youth and youth policy. Principles of the state youth policy of the Russian Federation, the emergence of the “Youth of Russia” program. Disadvantages in the development and implementation of state youth policy in the Russian Federation.

thesis, added 02/26/2012


Main stages, aspects and directions of state regional policy in the Russian Federation. Socio-economic and political development in Kuzbass and Tomsk region. The effectiveness of state regional policy and ways to improve it.

thesis, added 06/24/2009


Studying the principles of state scientific, technical and innovation policy - an integral part of socio-economic policy, which expresses the state’s attitude to scientific and scientific-technical activities. Russia's advancement towards a knowledge economy.

cheat sheet, added 11/11/2010


Problems of youth in modern Russia. State youth policy in the Russian Federation: concept, goals and objectives, priority areas, implementation mechanisms. Efficiency and main problems of implementing state youth policy.

thesis, added 07/19/2014


Definition, essence and content of state information policy. The role of society's activities, basic paradigms. Technologies of influencing public consciousness using the media. Information Code of the Russian Federation, its goals and objectives.

test, added 01/13/2017


Characteristics of the concept of state youth policy in the Russian Federation, definition of its essence, problems and main directions. Mechanisms, tools and analysis of the activities of authorities to implement youth policy in the Pskov region.

course work, added 04/17/2012


Basic doctrines of Russian religious denominations. The purpose and objectives of the state's religious policy. Socialization of religion as a complex task of the state’s religious policy. The religious situation in modern Russia: changes, trends, contradictions.

course work, added 06/02/2015


The essence and objectives of state regional policy, its aspects and stages of implementation in Russia. Socio-economic and political development of the Moscow region. Programs to improve the environment, support mortgage lending and business in the region.

course work, added 11/10/2013


Regional policy in the Russian Federation: concepts, goals, objectives, elements, levels. Strategic goals of the state social policy. State regulation of problem regions. Development of federal relations and the role of local government.

MAIN PRIORITIES OF STATE ECONOMIC POLICY IN THE CREATION OF A NEW ECONOMY

ALEXEYEV ALEXEY VENIAMINOVICH,

Candidate of Economic Sciences, Leading Researcher at the Institute of Economics and Organization of Industrial Production SB RAS.

Email address: [email protected]

The article analyzes the key competencies of the state in creating a new economy. The age structure of production equipment is assessed. The conditions necessary to create a new economy have been identified. The creation of internal and the struggle for the opening of external markets that correspond to the systemic properties of the new economy are described. The institutions of the new economy are considered.

Key words: new economy; investments; innovation; institutes.

The author analyzes the state responsibility in creating a new economy. The age distribution of production equipment is estimated. The article also introduces conditions which are necessary for the creation of a new economy and considers the new economy institutions. The article describes the internal markets creation and struggle for the foreign markets opening, the new economy relevant system properties.

Keywords: new economy; investment; innovation; institutions.

JEL classifier codes: B52, F59, O31.

Qualitative changes, signs of which began to be observed in the economies of developed countries, began to be discussed seriously in the second half of the last century. In 1959, D. Bell introduced the concept of “post-industrial society,” denoting a society in which the industrial sector gives way to science, and its development is determined by the ability to generate new information and knowledge. Therefore, the special interest in the new economy that emerged in the last decade of the 20th century did not come as a surprise.

In the world economic community, the term “new economy” has not gained universal recognition, but the very problem of transforming the traditional economy into an information economy has received recognition. This problem is relevant for any national economy; for Russia it is doubly relevant. Indeed, significant changes in the very foundations of the economies of Western countries were actively taking place just when Russia was painfully moving from an administrative to a market system. The risk of “falling out” of the world civilization process then increased sharply: the transition from the old to the new is in itself quite painful, but multiplied by the general degradation of the national economy, it went beyond all reasonable norms.

How to counter this risk? What type of economy is in Russia's long-term interests? What needs to be done within the framework of state economic policy to ensure that these interests are ensured? These and other questions are at the center of this study.

1. KEY COMPETENCIES OF THE STATE IN CREATION OF A NEW ECONOMY

There is no precedent in the world for creating a new economy without the active participation of the state. Obviously, Russia, with its strong paternalistic traditions, rich historical experience in implementing large national projects and with its still rather superficial market thinking, will be no exception to this rule. At the same time, these features further actualize the problem with which developed economies have long been familiar: “What exactly should state participation be in the construction of a new economy?”

© A.V. Alekseev, 2010

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

Boundary answers to this question are known:

■ The state itself is building a new economy.

■ The state creates conditions for its residents to independently build

new economy.

The final balance between the considered alternatives in Russia will be significantly closer to the first approach than to the second, which is typical for the United States and, to a somewhat lesser extent, for developed European countries. Russian society is prone to fairly strict regulation of market relations. In the United States (more) and Western Europe (less), society, on the contrary, generally recognizes that the state should not directly interfere in the economic activities of economic entities and act as such an entity itself (except in fairly clearly specified cases). The state is expected to undertake an obligation to primarily focus on providing institutional conditions for effective economic interaction between economic entities and the unconditional protection of their short- and long-term interests.

How large-scale is the activity of the Russian state within the framework of the “The state itself is building a new economy” scenario? Before the period of active creation of state corporations began, the Russian state demonstrated very restrained investment and innovation activity in the military sphere and almost completely withdrew from innovative activity in the civilian sphere.

So, in the 90s. last century, there was no need to talk about any innovative development at all: the sharply decreased investment activity did not ensure even the simple reproduction of the existing production system. Indeed, the rate of renewal of fixed assets began to grow only in 2001 and only in 2002, i.e. only seven years later, it exceeded the level of the already disastrous 1995. Subsequently, the rate of renewal of fixed assets gradually increased, however, even in the quite prosperous year of 2005, the level of renewal of fixed assets was almost THREE times lower than this indicator of the “Soviet” period.

The situation with the disposal of old fixed assets is no better. Active disposal of old, morally and physically worn-out equipment has never been a strong feature of the domestic industry. During the crisis of the 90s. the situation only got worse. However, as the economy stabilized and subsequently grew, equipment disposal continued to decline (Fig. 1). The situation is quite understandable - as enterprises emerged from the crisis, they gradually used their existing capacities. Experiencing severe financial restrictions, they were not able to adequately update their production apparatus and, therefore, were forced to maintain existing capacities. A significant part of enterprises generally find themselves in the “trap” of unused capacities: on the one hand, there are no funds to update capacities, on the other, existing capacities are used tens of percent below normal - why update them?

1990 1995 200 0 200 1 2002 2003 200 4 2005

Renewal and Retirement

Rice. 1. Renewal and disposal rates of fixed assets in comparable prices (in comparable prices)

Source: Russian Statistical Yearbook. 2006: Statistical collection/Rosstat. - M., 2006, 326

The result of the investment failure was a sharp increase in the average age of equipment.

The average age of equipment almost doubled (!) from 1990 to 2005 - from 10.8 to 19.3 years. The average age of equipment grew steadily, at an almost constant rate, and only in 2005 did a downward trend seem to emerge (Fig. 2).

1970 1975 1980 1985 1 990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1 999 200 0 2 001 200 2 2 003 2004 2005

Rice. 2. Average age of equipment, years

Source: Russian Statistical Yearbook. 2005: Statistical collection/Rosstat.- M., 2005, 392. Construction in Russia.

2006: Statistical collection/Rosstat. - M., 2006, 157

It is worth remembering that in the early 90s. last century, the figure of 12 years was considered unacceptably high, and even then “the scientific community was sounding the alarm” that it was necessary to take urgent effective measures to prevent a catastrophe in the national production apparatus. These alarmist sentiments were actually ignored in those years; fortunately, life has shown that even with the average age of the equipment fleet twice as large, the economy continues to function and even somehow develop. But this does not solve the very problem of the extremely high average age of equipment in the national industry.

Indeed, it is difficult to expect that a domestic commodity producer will be able to produce competitive products for the open Russian and, especially, the world market using “relict” equipment. More precisely, it can if we are talking about the extraction of natural resources or environmentally polluting industries, i.e. those industries that a foreign manufacturer either cannot or, under the terms of strict national legislation, does not want to apply for.

A weak investment process, therefore, washes out from Russian industry those industries whose products compete fiercely with the products of foreign manufacturers, i.e. precisely the area in which the greatest added value is created. It is obvious that in this case the declared course towards creating a new economy adequate to the requirements of today and its actual development do not correlate with each other in any way.

2. AGE STRUCTURE OF PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT

Since the beginning of the 90s. last century, the age structure of production equipment in industry changed radically. From 1990 to 2004 the share of the youngest group of equipment (up to five years old) decreased almost 3.5 times (and if compared with the 1970s - generally 4.4 times), the share of equipment in the middle age decreased 5.5 times (from 6 to 10 years), the share of old equipment more than doubled (from 16 to 20 years) and the share of the oldest equipment (over 20 years) more than tripled. Thus, if in 1990 almost 60% of the equipment in Russian industry was under 10 years old, then in 2004 such equipment became less than 14%.

Perhaps the only positive trend that can be identified is the increase in the share of the youngest equipment since 2000. Indeed, the share of equipment

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

ore production under five years of age by 1999 compared to 1992 decreased by 5.6 times; by 2004, the situation here had improved (Fig. 3, Table 1).

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Rice. 3. Age structure of production equipment in industry, %

Table 1

Age structure of production equipment in industry, %

1975 1985 1990 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

All equipment (end of year) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

of which in age, years:

up to 5 37.5 33.1 29.4 10.1 5.2 4.1 4.1 4.7 5.7 6.7 7.8 8.6

6 - 10 29,7 28,2 28,3 29,8 24,1 20,1 15,2 10,6 7,6 5,8 4,9 5,1

11 - 15 14,8 16 16,5 22 24,7 25,3 25,7 25,5 23,2 20 16,4 12,3

16 - 20 9 9,8 10,8 15 17,5 18,9 20,1 21 21,9 22,6 22,7 22,5

more than 20 9 12.9 15 23.1 28.5 31.6 34.8 38.2 41.6 44.9 48.2 51.5

Source: Russian Statistical Yearbook. 2005: Statistical collection/Rosstat. - M., 2005, 392

Thus, at least until 2004, there was no noticeable positive impact of the state’s investment policy on the state of domestic fixed assets. With the creation of state corporations, perhaps the situation will begin to change. Until recently, the state was limited to demonstrating (not always successfully) its “best” intentions to support business investment programs, but nothing more.

All the more relevant is the answer to the second question posed: “What conditions does the state create for its residents so that they can independently build a new economy?”

3. CONDITIONS NECESSARY TO CREATE A NEW ECONOMY

In developed economies, the minimum necessary to create a new economy is the fulfillment of the following three basic conditions:

Ensuring the stability of the financial system;

Making investments in people and technology;

Creation of internal and expansion of external markets.

Ensuring the stability of the financial system. The stability of the financial system is usually ensured when at least two conditions are met: strict control over budget expenditures, on the one hand, and a low refinancing rate, on the other.

The Russian budget has been in surplus for several years now; the refinancing rate is formally relatively high (currently 10%), but in reality it is even lower than the inflation rate. Although the country has high inflation, it is not so much a consequence of the irresponsible policy of the government, seeking to provide high social benefits with low budget revenues, but rather a payment for the low exchange rate of the ruble and changes in the global price environment, independent of the nature of domestic economic policy.

There is no reason to expect that the stability of the financial system in Russia will be disrupted in the foreseeable future.

Investing in people and technology. The new economy is based on working with information and generating new knowledge. Sustainable generation of more and more new knowledge is unattainable within the framework of an education system that ensures industrial production. The only way not to fall out of the new economy is to constantly update your accumulated knowledge. The existing education system copes poorly with this task. Traditional education formats are aimed at young people and do not provide quality education throughout the entire period of a person’s working life. The modern economy places a demand specifically for highly educated workers.

In recent years, in connection with the launch of the National Education Project, the situation has begun to change. However, the project is designed for the long term, and quick results cannot be expected. Thus, “on the line” of “investing in people,” Russia deserves a low rating: investments in the education system are not so small, but the organization of education itself is inadequate to the requirements of the new economy. At the same time, there is no doubt that the potential of the Russian education sector is very high, but whether it will be effectively used is currently an open question.

Is there enough investment in technology in Russia?

In the last decade of the last century, the number of research and development personnel declined rapidly. In recent years, this process has slowed down, but has by no means stopped. On the other hand, since the beginning of this century, funding for science has begun to improve. The level of this financing, both in absolute and relative terms, is currently quite far from the indicators of 1992, but the movement towards restoring pre-crisis indicators is quite stable (Table 2).

table 2

Funding of science from the federal budget

Indicators 1992 1995 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Number of organizations carrying out research and development, total 4555 4059 4019 4099 4037 3906 3797 3656 3566

Number of personnel engaged in research and development, thousand people. 1533 1061 855 887.7 885.6 870.9 858.5 839.3 813.2

Federal budget expenditures, million rubles. 17396.4 23687.7 31055.8 41576.3 47478.1 76909.3

including:

fundamental research 8219.3 11666.6 16301.5 21073.3 24850.3 32025.1

applied research 9177.1 12021.1 14754.4 20503 22627.8 44884.2

as a percentage of GDP 0.5 0.31 0.24 0.24 0.26 0.29 0.31 0.28 0.36

as a percentage of federal budget expenditures 2.43 1.6 1.32 1.69 1.79 1.51 1.76 1.76 2.19

Source: Russia in figures, 2005, 287, 292.

Russian statistical yearbook, 2005, 592. Russian statistical yearbook, 2006, 587, 589, 596

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

The reduction in the number of organizations that carried out research and development at the expense of the federal budget, and the reduction in the number of personnel engaged in research and development, is difficult to interpret as a positive phenomenon. Little that can be said to justify this trend is that, for example, the absolute amounts of R&D spending in Canada and Russia are comparable, but per capita R&D spending in Canada is more than six times higher (in the US almost 13 times) (Table 3). At the same time, Russia’s share in global spending on science does not exceed 1%, and the number of Russian researchers is almost 11% of the world’s total. The number of researchers in Russia is approximately equal to the number of researchers in Japan, but Japan’s share in financing research and development of world science is more than 15 times higher than Russia’s. Small, unconcentrated, “scattered” expenses among a large number of research centers and researchers, of course, contribute to the development of the national economy, but are not capable of producing the effect that is achieved in developed countries.

The rapid growth of costs for science in real terms and the increase in the share of these costs in GDP is a clearly positive phenomenon. The “fly in the ointment” here is that this growth comes from a very low base. Despite the good dynamics of growth in research costs, Russia lags so far behind developed countries in terms of the absolute level of these costs that even at high rates it will take many years to reach at least European levels. The prospect of catching up with the United States is a very distant future (Table 3).

Rice. 4. Allocations for the section “Fundamental Research and Promotion of Scientific and Technological Progress” of the federal budget in constant 1991 prices, million rubles. Excluding appropriations for the section “Research and development work in the field of space activities”

Source: Science in Russia, 2001, 59-60.

Russian statistical yearbook, 2004, 546.

Russian statistical yearbook, 2005, 592.

Russia in numbers, 2005, 292

Table 3

Internal research costs in 2002

Countries Total, billion dollars Per capita, dollars

Russia 10.2 70.2

UK 25.4 427.6

Germany 47.6 580.2

Italy 13.8 240.6

Canada 13.4 439.9

USA 243.6 892.1

France 28.8 478.1

Japan 94.7 747.7

Source: Beketov N. (2004). State policy of innovation // Economist. - No. 9. - 66

The structure of investments in fixed capital in the “Science and Scientific Services” industry clearly indicates that if anyone is concerned about the development of science in Russia, it is the state. Almost all investments here are made in state ownership, and this trend is only intensifying. Private capital behaves here with extreme restraint. The situation with mixed ownership is little better. Foreign capital was previously directed reluctantly into the domestic industry “Science and scientific services”; in recent years, there has been a gradual disappearance of this almost symbolic desire (Table 4).

Table 4

Structure of investments in fixed assets in the “Science and Scientific Services” industry by type of ownership, % of the volume of investments in the industry

Type of ownership 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Russian 88.5 95.6 94.2 94.5 96.5

State 70 74.9 72.6 73.8 79.9

Municipal 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3

Private 4.3 7.7 10.4 12 7.7

Mixed 13.3 12.4 10.8 8.5 8.6

Foreign 2 1.5 2.3 0.9 0.4

Joint Russian and foreign 9.5 2.9 3.5 4.6 3.1

Source: Investments in Russia, 2001. - M., 2001, 31. Investments in Russia, 2001. - M., 2003, 32-33. Investments in Russia, 2005. - M., 2005, 52-53

If in 1990, research and development costs in the Russian Federation amounted to more than 2% of GDP, which was only slightly lower than in developed European countries, then by 1995 the ratio in question had deteriorated significantly. With the subsequent rapid increase in costs, the situation has begun to improve, but the ratio of R&D costs compared to developed countries remains unacceptably low. Moreover, in recent years, the economy has been growing faster than spending on research and development, which only confirms the fact that it is focused on extensive rather than intensive growth factors (Table 5). In any case, the dynamics under consideration do not give grounds to say that there have been obvious changes in the domestic economy in favor of creating an economy focused primarily on creating added value, and not on reproducing the Russian economy in its modern format.

Table 5

Domestic research and development costs, % of GDP

Countries 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Russia 2.03 0.85 1.05 1.18 1.25 1.28 1.16

USA 2.65 2.51 2.72 2.74 2.67 2.68 2.68

Austria 1.39 1.56 1.91 2.03 2.12 2.2 2.24

Great Britain 2.16 1.98 1.86 1.87 1.89 1.88

Germany 2.75 2.19 2.45 2.46 2.49 2.52 2.49

China 0.6 1 0.95 1.07 1.13 1.23

Netherlands 2.07 1.99 1.82 1.8 1.72 1.76 1.78

Poland 1 0.68 0.66 0.64 0.59 0.56 0.58

Portugal 0.52 0.57 0.8 0.85 0.8 0.78

Republic of Korea 2.37 2.39 2.59 2.53 2.63 2.85

Türkiye 0.32 0.38 0.64

Finland 1.88 2.26 3.38 3.38 3.43 3.48 3.51

France 2.37 2.29 2.18 2.2 2.23 2.18 2.16

Sweden 3.35 4.25 3.95

Japan 2.96 2.9 2.99 3.07 3.12 3.15 3.13

Source: Russia and countries of the world, 2002, 358; Russia and the countries of the world, 2004, 296. Russia and the countries of the world, 2006, 308

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

Over the past decade, the ratio of “basic research - applied research - development” has changed somewhat: in the cost structure, the share of research, both fundamental and applied, has decreased, and the share of development has increased, accordingly (Table 6). Perhaps this means the gradual commercialization of science, more active use by business of the results of fundamental and applied research. On the other hand, a course towards creating large-scale scientific foundations for transferring the economy to an innovation mode within the framework of the dynamics under consideration is still not visible.

Table 6

Internal current costs for research and development by type of work, %

Costs 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

All costs 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

including by type of work

Basic research 16.9 15.7 15.8 17.7 16.1 14.2 13.4 13.9 14.6 15.1 14.2 14.0

applied research 20.5 18.1 16.2 16.8 16.9 17.4 16.4 16.4 15.9 15.6 16.5 16.4

Developments 62.7 66.2 68.0 65.5 67.0 68.3 70.2 69.7 69.4 69.4 69.4 69.5

Calculated from: Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2003, 533. Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2004, 548. Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2005, 594. Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2006, 598

Table 7

Distribution of internal research and development costs by sector

activities in 2004, in%

Countries Total Public sector Business sector Higher education sector Private non-profit sector

Russia 100 25.3 69.1 5.5 0.2

USA 100 12.2 70.1 13.6 4.1

Austria 100 5.7 66.8 27 0.4

UK 100 9.7 65.7 21.4 3.2

Germany 100 13.2 70.4 16.3

Spain 100 16 54.4 29.5 0.1

Italy 100 17.5 47.3 33.9 1.4

China 100 23 66.8 10.2

Netherlands 100 14.4 57.8 27.9 0

Poland 100 39 28.7 32 0.4

Portugal 100 16.9 33.2 38.4 11.5

Republic of Korea 100 12.1 76.7 9.9 1.3

Türkiye 100 7 28.7 64.3

Finland 100 9.5 70.1 19.8 0.6

Switzerland 100 1.1 73.7 22.9 2.3

France 100 16.7 62.9 19.1 1.3

Sweden 100 3.5 74.1 22 0.4

Japan 100 9.5 75.2 13.4 1.9

Source: Russia and countries of the world, 2004, 297

The interest of business in the commercialization of existing scientific developments is also manifested in its high share in the total costs of research and development. This share corresponds to the level of developed countries. Does not correspond to world practice

an abnormally high share of the public sector in total research and development costs and an abnormally low share of the higher education sector in these costs (Table 7). This difference is easily explained by the specifics of the organization of domestic research work: in the Russian Federation, scientific research has historically developed within the framework of the Academy system, and not the Ministry of Higher Education. At the same time, world practice shows that such low scientific and technical activity in the field of higher education does not benefit either business or education.

As the Russian economy integrates into the world economy in general and Russian education in particular, we should expect an increase in the activity of Russian universities in the field of research and development and/or further integration of Russian academic science and education. This is exactly what is happening in the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, where the differences along the lines of “public sector” and “higher education sector” are more formal than substantive.

Financing innovation in the Russian manufacturing sector. The Russian manufacturing sector is demonstrating high rates of growth in spending on technological innovation. At the same time, the costs of process innovations, rather than product innovations, increase primarily. A sustainable focus of business on transforming its technological basis, and not on simply improving manufactured products within the framework of unchanged technologies, is a clear sign that domestic business is no longer living in the present day and is ready to invest money in its future development. The acquisition of new technologies and replacement of old equipment is, if not a guarantee of successful integration of the Russian economy into the world economy, then at least its basis (Fig. 5).

Rice. 5. Costs of industrial production organizations on technological innovations by type of innovation and type of economic activity, %

Calculated from: Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2003, 539. Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2004, 552. Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2005, 599. Russia in numbers, 2006, 320

The structure of costs for technological innovation is dominated by metallurgical production, followed by the production of vehicles with a noticeable lead. The shares of other industries are small. At the same time, the costs of technological innovation in mechanical engineering are not only relatively small, but also tend to decrease. The situation in the production of electrical equipment, electronic and optical equipment is a little better, but even here, judging by the costs, it cannot be said that this industry is the leader of technical progress in the domestic manufacturing industry (Table 8).

In general, the Russian economy does not yet “want” to integrate into the global economy as a supplier of new technologies and modern equipment. But the world market’s request for the supply of energy- and resource-intensive environmentally “flawed” products, such as products of the metallurgical and chemical industries, is readily responded to. Serious research and development budgets with good dynamics are easily formed here. The situation is quite good in transport engineering and in the production of equipment for such infrastructure sectors as electricity, gas and water distribution. But in mechanical engineering and instrument making the dynamics are much more sluggish.

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

Obviously, the economic model of behavior of economic entities that has developed in Russia forms priorities in sectoral development not in the way that supporters of creating a new economy in the country would like, but in the way that the world market “here and now” requires. The trend is not new, but the question is: “Is the world economy “formatting” the Russian economy to suit its own needs or is the Russian economy solving its problems using the opportunities provided by the world economy?” does not become less relevant. If you still take on the solution to this issue, it is worth seeing the positive side of the current situation: the existing situation simplifies the management task rather than complicates it. Indeed, an “offensive along the entire front”, a dispersal of forces to raise all sectors strategically important for the Russian economy, is not required. Some of these industries have “found themselves” in the global division of labor and are developing quite successfully. It is only necessary to clearly define priorities in industry development and concentrate efforts where the market solves the problem of modernization poorly or does not solve it at all.

Table 8

Costs of industrial production organizations on technological innovations, %

Types of costs 2004 2005

Total 100 100

Mining 10.5 5.5

Extraction of fuel and energy minerals 9.1 3.6

Extraction of mineral resources, except fuel and energy 1.4 1.8

Manufacturing industries 87.4 87.1

Production of food products, including drinks, and tobacco 13.1 7.3

Textile and clothing production 1.0 0.7

Production of leather, leather goods and footwear production 0.1 0.1

Wood processing and production of wood and cork products 1.0 0.5

Pulp and paper production, publishing and printing activities 2.7 3.0

Production of coke and petroleum products 6.9 4.5

Chemical production 6.2 10.9

Production of rubber and plastic products 0.5 1.2

Production of other non-metallic mineral products 3.4 3.6

Metallurgical production and production of finished metal products 21.4 23.4

Production of machinery and equipment 5.1 4.9

Production of electrical equipment, electronic and optical equipment 6.2 8.3

Production of vehicles and equipment 13.7 14.3

Other industries not included in other groups of manufacturing industries 6.2 4.5

Production and distribution of electricity, gas and water 2.1 7.4

Calculated from: Russian Statistical Yearbook, 2006, 603-604

The structure of costs for technological innovation by type of economic activity is even more informative. It was already noted above that the share of expenses of industrial organizations on research and development is small. However, it differs significantly across sectors of economic activity. Thus, in the “extraction of mineral resources” the share of costs for research and development is several times higher than in industry as a whole (half of all costs for technological innovation), and in the “extraction of fuel and energy mineral resources” it is almost 60%. The share of costs for the purchase of machinery and equipment here, accordingly, is significantly less than the average, and the cost of purchasing software is higher. It will be shown below that exactly this structure of costs for technological innovation is typical for developed countries. It does not follow from this that the domestic fuel and energy complex, in terms of its level of development, is closer to the level of developed countries than other sectors of the domestic production sector, but the cost structure in question is still an informative indicator. It is impossible not to pay attention, however, to the fact that

Of all the costs for technological innovations in the mining industry, the share of fuel and energy minerals accounts for two-thirds of the budget under consideration, and for technological innovations in the extraction of ALL other minerals, of which, as is known, there are many in Russia, only one-third.

The share of research and development costs is also high in the “production of electrical equipment, electronic and optical equipment”, as well as in the “production of vehicles and equipment”. Next by a large margin is “production of machinery and equipment.” The share of costs for research and development in other industries is small, which forms the low level of costs for the item under consideration for the industry as a whole.

Thus, technological innovations in domestic industry are implemented mainly (and in many industries to a decisive extent) through the acquisition of new machines and equipment. In-house research and development is small or almost non-existent. Only 1% of the results of scientific and technical activities are in economic circulation, while in the USA and Great Britain - up to 70% (Obolensky, 2006, 85). This mode is quite acceptable for catching up or copying development formats, but it is clearly not suitable for “ordering the tune” in the market of new technologies. Obviously, the technological level of domestic industry is increasing. However, for now it is a recipient of Western machines and technologies. If Russia plays an independent role in these markets, it will be in the future. It cannot be said that Russia is not moving in the direction of just such a future, but it is too early to talk about its “automatic” onset.

So, the costs of innovation are rising. What are the results? As usual, the results are noticeably more modest than the costs, although they have a pronounced correlation. Thus, the share of organizations that carried out technological innovations in the total number of industrial production organizations, having decreased in 2002, grew until 2004; in 2005 it decreased noticeably again.

The share of organizations that carried out technological innovations in the total number of organizations is frankly small - within 10%. In such industries as textile and clothing production, production and distribution of electricity, gas and water, the number of enterprises that introduced technological innovations is completely symbolic - within 4%. At the same time, a number of industries are very active in this sense. Thus, in the production of coke and petroleum products, technological innovations were introduced at every third enterprise, in chemical production and the production of electrical equipment, electronic and optical equipment - at every fourth. Innovative activity in mechanical engineering exceeds the industry average, but not by much (Table 9).

Be that as it may, in most sectors of Russian industry, innovative technological activity is low. The level of innovative activity of Russian enterprises, even in the context of the investment boom of recent years, does not exceed 10%, compared to an average of 51% in the EU countries and 70% in the USA (Obolensky, 2006, 85). Taking into account the accumulated lag behind the world technological level in the disastrous 90s, the activity of Russian enterprises in question is clearly insufficient for successful integration into the world economy for most industries. The decline in innovative technological activity of natural monopolies is particularly alarming. Thus, the share of enterprises implementing technological innovations in the fuel and energy complex, production and distribution of electricity, gas and water is gradually decreasing. In more competitive industries, the situation is noticeably better, which in itself suggests that in relation to natural monopolies the state should pursue a more balanced economic policy that counteracts the “natural” desire of the monopoly to preserve the existing status quo.

It should be noted that the number of advanced production technologies used in domestic industry is growing steadily. What is alarming, however, is the fact that patents are the basis for what are considered advanced production technologies in less than 3% of cases. It is obvious that a significant part of “advanced production technologies” can be considered such only with a certain stretch. Technologies that not only improve the technological process, but translate it

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES (Journal of Institutional Studies) Volume 2, No. 1. 2010

for a new technological base, obviously significantly less. However, the number of patents in the technologies used is growing rapidly.

Table 9

Innovatively active industrial production organizations by type

economic activity

Types of economic activity Number of organizations that carried out technological innovations The share of organizations that carried out technological innovations in the total number of organizations, %

2002 2003 2004 2005 2002 2003 2004 2005

Total 2168 2191 2192 2402 9.8 10.3 10.5 9.3

Extraction of fuel and energy minerals 40 37 37 33 7.6 7.3 7.4 5.7

Extraction of mineral resources, except fuel and energy 29 30 32 36 4 4.5 4.8 5.6

Production of food products, including beverages, and tobacco 406 400 384 387 7.9 7.9 7.7 8

Textile and clothing production 72 72 66 64 3.2 3.7 3.9 4.3

Production of leather, leather goods and footwear production 16 19 16 13 4.7 6.4 6.5 6.1

Wood processing and production of wood and cork products 29 32 37 34 2.9 3.2 4.4 4.6

Pulp and paper production, publishing and printing activities 83 92 81 103 5.6 6.5 5.9 3.3

Production of coke and petroleum products 27 33 25 27 31.8 43.4 29.8 31.4

Chemical production 158 160 140 147 26.3 25.9 22.8 23.5

Production of rubber and plastic products 46 44 41 44 13 11.5 10.2 10.7

Production of other non-metallic mineral products 117 114 142 139 6.8 7.1 9.1 9.3

Metallurgical production and production of finished metals. products 139 134 135 151 12.8 11.9 11.3 11.9

Production of machinery and equipment 293 288 273 271 12.6 13.4 14.2 13.5

Production of electrical equipment, electronic and optical equipment 364 373 392 427 24.4 25.9 26 26.8

Production of vehicles and equipment 158 ​​166 173 190 20.2 21.2 21.8 23.8

Other industries not included in other groups of manufacturing industries 128 115 143 125 14.8 13.8 17 14.2

Production and distribution of electricity, gas and water 63 82 75 211 5.1 6.4 4.7 4.2