Определение входных барьеров в экономической теории и практике антимонопольной политики
In 2004–2005 the Russian government started to implement the reform of public procurement. In order to decrease incentives to corruption and encourage competition, they established new procurement procedures. Meanwhile, according to the anecdotal evidence, since the decade of the reform, diff erent types of rent-seeking behavior have been still widespread in Russian procurement. In this article we conduct a comparative analysis of the procurement procedures in Federal Law 44 depending on the risks of rent-seeking behavior of public procurers and suppliers. We consider restrictions of competition to be indicators of corruption risks, i.e. the procurer’s rent-seeking behavior, and collusive practices (including imitation of collusion) and adverse selection to be indicators of the bidder’s rent-seeking behavior. At fi rst we describe Russian procurement procedures and then we employ the case-study in order to analyze in-depth risks of various forms of rent-seeking behavior. We fi nd that the risks of procurers’ rent-seeking behavior are negatively connected to the risks of suppliers’ rent-seeking. Some procurement procedures have more corruption risks, while others provide ample opportunities for collusion practices or an adverse selection. Basing on these results, we make recommendations to the regulator and to the government. First, the stimulating eff ect of monitoring will be higher under fi xed monitoring costs, if the regulator monitors more probable forms of rentseeking in each procurement procedure. Second, the social welfare will be highest, if the choice of procurement procedure is based not only on the product’s characteristics, but also on the market structure, including the risks of horizontal collusion.
The paper provides a theoretical model, which studies the influence of political institutions and economic inequality on barriers to entry on markets, a level of redistribution, technological progress and economic growth. The model combines two approaches of modern economic literature, endogenous growth models of creative destruction and the approach of the political economy of development, according to which political institutions determine a social choice of economic institutions, which influence long-term growth rates. On the first step of the game agents differing in their incomes, skills and political power, make a social decision about the level of redistribution and the level of barriers to entry on markets. On the second step agents make economic decisions on investment, production and consumption. Political regimes differ in the distribution of votes between agents. The model explains the empirical evidence, suggesting that the transition to democracy in short and middle term reduces inequality in incomes, but does not always lead to the formation of institutions, favoring the equality of opportunities. In the model the influence of political regimes on barriers to entry on markets depends on the initial level of inequality in incomes and skills, and also on the average level of skills. In a society with a high level of inequality in incomes and skills, the existence of a majority coalition, which support a high level of barriers to entry on markets is more probable. This coalition will include the richest agents and the least skilled agents. The results of the model explain different outcomes of democratization process in terms of its effect on barriers to entry on markets and economic growth. The paper also considers four examples of third-wave democratization, which illustrates the results of the model.
The paper examines the structure, governance, and balance sheets of state-controlled banks in Russia, which accounted for over 55 percent of the total assets in the country's banking system in early 2012. The author offers a credible estimate of the size of the country's state banking sector by including banks that are indirectly owned by public organizations. Contrary to some predictions based on the theoretical literature on economic transition, he explains the relatively high profitability and efficiency of Russian state-controlled banks by pointing to their competitive position in such functions as acquisition and disposal of assets on behalf of the government. Also suggested in the paper is a different way of looking at market concentration in Russia (by consolidating the market shares of core state-controlled banks), which produces a picture of a more concentrated market than officially reported. Lastly, one of the author's interesting conclusions is that China provides a better benchmark than the formerly centrally planned economies of Central and Eastern Europe by which to assess the viability of state ownership of banks in Russia and to evaluate the country's banking sector.
The paper examines the principles for the supervision of financial conglomerates proposed by BCBS in the consultative document published in December 2011. Moreover, the article proposes a number of suggestions worked out by the authors within the HSE research team.