Кризис! Какой кризис? Размышления о европейской интеграции: 50 лет Римским договорам
On the Russian population opinion one of the most urgent ecology problems is the water pollution. By the data of Russian Federal Consumer Rights Protection and Human Health Control Service about 37% of the surface sources of centralized drinking water supply don`t meet sanitary norms and rules and 22% of Russian citizens do not have access to centralized water supply .
The study outlined three possible ways of overcoming above marked problems. The first method is based on the modern industrial-management scheme which is traditional for water provision in Russia. The second option suggests cleaning up sources of water intakes. The third way shows an option of varying treatment methods and technologies, depending on customer needs.
The Roadmap developed by Higher School of Economics and Rusnano indentified that nanotechnologies increase the efficiency and decrease energy consumption of traditional as well as innovation processes of water purification. In particular the perspective area of nanotechnology application is lies in the sphere of innovation sorbents and coagulants. Moreover nanotechnologies can also be used in baromembrane processes and membrane bioreactors.
Innovation technologies, processes and products implementation should be specific to individual regions and municipalities. This approach is based on the compliance of centralized and decentralized water supply, inlet and outlet water quality.
The Roadmap results are designed for the formation of government and regional policy on the pure water provision for population and industrial water treatment. Furthermore it indicates the most relevant business ideas and evaluates projects for nanotechnology and nanoproducts used in this field.
Using data on foreign borrowing, I identify Russian banks that were affected by the sudden stop of external financing caused by the Lehman Brothers’ collapse. Applying the difference-in-difference method, I compare these «affected» banks to «unaffected» ones and find that the Russian Central Bank’s (CBR) anti-crisis financial assistance primarily went to the former group. Tracing the impact of the CBR’s liquidity infusions on banks’ portfolio allocation decisions, I find that banks used CBR funds not only to pay out foreign debt, but also to accumulate cash deposits in non-resident banks. I also find that affected banks increased their holdings of market securities significantly more than unaffected ones, which suggests that the CBR’s bailout policies impacted their risk-taking strategies. While there was no significant difference in corporate lending growth between the two groups after the sudden stop, lending to borrowers with weaker banking relationships (individuals and entrepreneurs) decreased more among affected banks.