Government Support of Small Business in Russia
The paper deals with the development of the entrepreneurship and SME policy support agenda in some CEE and CIS countries in the process of systemic transition, basing both on desk research and the results of an own expert survey in 14 countries. Th e author points out the initial diff erences of the socio-economic context of SME policy in transitional societies from the very beginning of the systemic transition and emphasizes the role of the framework rules and regulations of the EU in the establishment of the appropriate policy in the CEE countries. He shows both similarities as well as peculiarities in the design of the SME policy in 14 Post-Socialist economies. Taking the experience of the CEE and CIS countries with very diff erent framework conditions and economic performance, the paper transfers some obtained evidence into the Russian context, offering a re-conceptualization of the established entrepreneurship and SME policy towards a more stringent consideration of both framework conditions and the state of the SME on the regional level.
Th e article is aimed at analysing budget risks related to activities of development institutions and ways of reducing such risks. Th e paper looks at fi nancing models of development institutions in Russia, including the following models: budget fi nancing, public guarantees, capital contributions and concessional deposits. Th e analysis of the Russian development institutions shows that, although, in general all measures of the government support are in place, in a number of key organizations there is a mismatch between market liabilities and non-market assets, which create budget risks. Th e list of such organizations includes Vnesheconombank, Russian Agricultural Bank and DOM.RF (Russian Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending). Th e article further analyses the case of budget support for the Vnesheconombank in 2015–2018, which is the largest case of public support for the development institution in Russia. Th e authors come to the conclusion that the main source of risk is political interference in the activities of the development bank and absence of compensation for fi nancing of low-return projects. Based on the analysis of international best practices the recommendations are given on reduction of budget risks related to development institutions, including such policies as provision of public guarantee, loan portfolio breakdown into subsidized and non-subsidized loans; regular budget transfers and concessional deposits. Th e article concludes that in order to reduce budget risks related to development institutions in Russia the Government needs to develop a transparent framework of compensation evaluation and establishment of mechanism of regular compensation for their activities
The problems of social and economic development of Siberia and the Far East are discusses in article. The analysis and evaluation of the federal government activities in development and implementations of plans for the Siberian and Far Eastern territories development are conducted. The article shows the unjustified transformation of the development basic tools (dissemination of TPD ideas throughout the country and others) and delaying already prepared decision-making processes (funds and other development institutions establishment).