Трансформации государственной политики в отношении малого и среднего предпринимательства России
Russian government policy on small and medium-sized enterprises initially focuses on copying and introducing western institutions and, secondly, on permanent increasing the number of organizations and forms of SMEs’ support. After several structural reorganizations government support for SMEs widely covered federal, regional and municipal levels of management. But even with the backbone of more than 30 billion rubles worth budgetary infusions SMEs support system has been unable to provide favorable conditions for the development of this sector of economy. The reasons for this should be sought in the potential and the actual place of SMEs in the current structure of the Russian economy.
The article presents a theoretical survey of different ways to analyze the effect coexistence of spot and forward markets has on incentives for non-competitive behavior. There is no common opinion in economic theory concerning the influence of forward contracts on incentives for non-competitive behavior in spot market. Several studies support the hypothesis that introduction of forward trading increases competition in the spot market by erosion of market power. But while it can reduce market power of an individual firm, forward trading facilitates tacit collusion in the market. This ambiguity demonstrates complexity of economic research, aimed at increasing social welfare.
The article presents an analysis of the development of metropolitan areas in Mexico and in the State of Hidalgo.
The author explores the reasons behind the crisis of single industry towns, possibilities and challenges of public private partnership in such towns, presenting foreign experience of transformation of old industrial territories and giving recommendations aimed at increasing efficiency of public policy concerning single industry towns.
The dominant policy style in Russia is reactive, short-term, hierarchical, and state-driven – the result of a strong legacy of authoritarianism as a stable component of political regimes in the Russian Empire, USSR, and the Russian Federation. More complex reasons lie behind this riven or divided policy-making style: namely, a split between universalities or ideology as a foundation for policy legitimacy and implementation. There is a significant gap between declared policy goals and ideas, planned policy strategies and formulations, on the one hand, and policy implementation, on the other. Manual government, corruption, and state imposition define the policy formulation process in Russia. Due to the strength of the imperial legacy and “empire syndrome” ideology, the riven policy style is reproduced by bureaucrats, experts, political elites, and the public, despite the widening gap between public declarations and policy outcomes. Simulations and imitations of strategic and anticipative policy-making, especially at the policy formulation stage, characterize the behavior of key policy actors. Nevertheless, in some sectors such as education, policy styles can differ from the dominant one to a more anticipative and inclusive, long term because of the active position of policy communities such as citizens’ groups and associations or epistemic communities.
Russian federal agencies have created a variety of consultative bodies during the last decade, but their role in the agency's decision-making process is yet to be evaluated. Relevant experience of other countries proposes two major political factors of consultative bodies' influence. The political culture orientation towards compromise and positive perception of interest groups' participation in the decision-making process seem to contribute to that influence.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.