Для каких фирм улучшился деловой климат в 2012–2014 гг.?
The paper exploits data collected in the framework of f ‘Russian firms in a global economy’ (RuFIGE) project, implemented as a part of the HSE Basic Research Program in 2014-2015. The research goals of the paper are: first, to evaluate changes in the business climate in Russia during the period of implementation of the program aimed at business climate improvement in 2012-2014; second, since the business environment reforms were initiated personally by Vladimir Putin, to analyze by the means of survey experiment the influence of reference to the politician in the question wording on the estimates of changes in business climate made by the respondents. The analysis is based on the data of the survey of managers of 1950 large, medium and small manufacturing firms in 60 Russian regions conducted by the HSE Institute for Industrial and Market Studies in summer-autumn of 2014. The results demonstrate that firms with longer planning horizon and firms that received support from the state are more likely to give positive assessments of the changes in business environment. Firms with state ownership, on the contrary, more often evaluate results of the reform negatively. Firms-investors do not differ from other firms in their assessment of business climate change. Reference to Vladimir Putin initiative on improving business environment leads to the statistically significant increase in the share of positive assessments of the changes for medium enterprises with 101-249 employees, and increases the share of refusals to respond to the question for large enterprises with 500 and more employees.
The author attempts to compare various models of political systems based not on GDP but on Human Development Index which to a greater extent demonstrates that political system correlate with political culture and traditions of a given country.
On the basis of in-depth case studies of four Russian regions, Kirov and Voronezh oblasts and Krasnoyarsk and Perm' krais, the trade-offs among social and economic policy at the regional level in Russia are examined. All four regional governments seek to develop entrepreneurship while preserving social welfare obligations and improving compensation in the public sector. Richer regions have a greater ability to reconcile social commitments with the promotion of business. Regions differ in their development strategies, some placing greater emphasis on indigenous business development and others seeking to attract federal or foreign investment. Governors have considerable discretion in choosing their strategy so long as they meet basic performance demands set by the federal government such as ensuring good results for the United Russia party. In all four regions, governments consult actively with local business associations whereas organized labor is weak. However, the absence of effective institutions to enforce commitments undertaken by government and its social partners undermines regional capacity to use social policy as a basis for long-term economic development.
The article analyzes the competitiveness of the Russian economy in comparison with the leading economies of the world in the context of Russia's WTO accession on aspects such as the level of interest rates and the availability of financial resources, the dynamics of energy prices, condition of fixed assets and investment activity, investment climate. We outline the basic negative tendencies, hindering the development of the economy and reducing its attractiveness to investors. Based on these results it can be argued that WTO accession will not lead to significant improvement of the investment climate and economic efficiency, and without the implementation of measures to address the problems considered, it can be a catalyst for the negative trends in Russian economy.
There is a sharp contradiction between public policies to support SMEs and features of Russian national SMEs. Using western experience in Russia, doing some bright projects to stimulate small businesses was important twenty years ago. Quantitative and qualitative parameters of SMEs in Russia lag behind most countries, largely due to the structure of its economy with the traditional dominance of large enterprises
and the prevailing business climate. Small and medium-sized business in Russia is not innovative, does not perform antitrust function and does not create many
jobs. Small and medium-sized business generates a positive competitive environment. But the importance of SMEs in Russia should not be exaggerated. The scale of subcontracting and franchising with independent small businesses in our country is extremely small. It happened so that the Russian economic policy and the leading part of the national political establishment were in a subordinate position in relation to the interests of a narrow circle of large businesses, mainly engaged in production and export of the most important natural resources. Manufacturing, infrastructural and other facilities of big business, its supply and marketing relations and, most importantly, its long-term economic interests focus on large enterprises and, with few exceptions, show no interest for the SMEs sector. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that the Russian system of economic institutions encourages big business mostly. It also proves an essential specific situation of small and medium-sized businesses in Russia. The development of Russian small and medium-sized business entirely depends on the state of the economy and the business climate in the country. The business climate in Russia does not correspond to the needs of small and medium-sized businesses. Measures to improve the business climate can potentially help Russian small and medium-sized businesses much more than the existing costly system meant to support them. It is obvious that the whole Russian system for SMEs support, fold increase in the federal budget to support Russian SMEs occurred in the recent years, is unable to compensate for a generally unfavorable business environment in Russia. It is necessary to improve the quality of investment, business climate and institutions in Russia. The real growth of the Russian SMEs can be expected only with the modernization, new industrialization of the Russian economy and business climate improvements.
Smoking is a problem, bringing signifi cant social and economic costs to Russiansociety. However, ratifi cation of the World health organization Framework conventionon tobacco control makes it possible to improve Russian legislation accordingto the international standards. So, I describe some measures that should be taken bythe Russian authorities in the nearest future, and I examine their effi ciency. By studyingthe international evidence I analyze the impact of the smoke-free areas, advertisementand sponsorship bans, tax increases, etc. on the prevalence of smoking, cigaretteconsumption and some other indicators. I also investigate the obstacles confrontingthe Russian authorities when they introduce new policy measures and the public attitudetowards these measures. I conclude that there is a number of easy-to-implementanti-smoking activities that need no fi nancial resources but only a political will.
One of the most important indicators of company's success is the increase of its value. The article investigates traditional methods of company's value assessment and the evidence that the application of these methods is incorrect in the new stage of economy. So it is necessary to create a new method of valuation based on the new main sources of company's success that is its intellectual capital.
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.