Capitalization of Professional Knowledge in Economies with Different Level of Innovation Development
This paper is focused on the problem of aggregate return to education. We consider this factor as an indicator of the professional knowledge capitalization that can be used as a proxy for human capital stock in extended Cobb-Douglas type equation for modeling the economic growth. Identification of the indicator is based on time-series data on countries and regional economies. To divide the objects into groups with respect to the aggregate return to education, we employ the fuzzy classification methodology instead of the traditional clustering procedure. This approach provides more relevant dividing the whole sample into three homogeneous groups. The first group includes the economies with low level of innovation development. These economies have close to zero or negative rate of return to education. The second group is most numerous. It mostly consists of developed economies with moderate aggregate rate of return to education. The third group includes objects with high return to education. It turned out that they are predominantly emerging economies developing on the base of new technologies. Such a typology provides the opportunities to make some suggestions concerning the relation between innovation development and quality of human capital stock. In particular, high rate of return to education in emerging economies we explain by the excess demand on high-qualified staff on the labor market that cannot be fully satisfied by existing educational system in the economies with higher level of innovation potential. Conversely, in developed economies, educational system meets the demand of the labor market, so the aggregate return to education is not so high. So it is necessary to be more specific about the structure of educational system for preparing high qualified staff for the most promising directions of innovation development. Comprehensive research of the considered problem at the regional level requires more elaborated data sources.
This Study was prepared by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Russian Energy Agency (REA), and the United States Energy Association (USEA) under the framework of the U.S./Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission Energy Efficiency Working Group’s Russian/American Smart Grid Partnership Initiative. This study was designed to provide the Russian and American stakeholders with on overarching 360 degree perspective on the major impediments to Smart Grid deployment in the U.S. and Russia. The study doesn’t include recommendation; it only assesses the current barriers that prevent smart grid technology deployment in the United States and Russia. It is organized into two parallel sections, one focusing on the impediments to smart grid technology deployment in the United States and the other on the impediments to its deployment in Russia. A common analytical framework for the study was jointly developed by the U.S. and Russian counterparts to ensure that the studies were parallel in their analyses and the impediments are divided into the following high level main Smart Grid related themes: Smart Grid Concept Markets Efficiency Cross-Subsidy Generation Consumer Participation Behavioral Norms Data & Analytics Smart Grid Investment Environment Education Grid Modernization A parallel series of in-person interviews were conducted in the U.S. and Russia with relevant smart grid stakeholders including government agencies, regulatory officials, infrastructure companies, electric utilities, industry associations, market operators, and research institutions. The interviews ranged 2-3 hours in length. The subjects were informed in advance that their opinions were not for attribution, leading to a candid exchange of opinion. A customized questionnaire jointly developed by the Russian and American expert consulting teams was utilized during each stakeholder interview.
Effective property rights protection plays a fundamental role in promoting economic performance. Yet measurement problems make the relationship between property rights and entrepreneurship an ambiguous issue. As an advancement on previous research in this paper we propose a new approach to the evaluation of the security of property rights based on direct measures that overcomes some limitations of previous studies. We apply this new metrics to a survey of manufacturing firms in Russia to identify the economic effects associated with the lack of property protection in a transition economy. Our analysis supports the view that there is a close relationship between institutions, property rights and economic growth. Our findings confirm that redistributive risks provide a depressing effect on investment and innovative activity of manufacturing enterprises and potentially result in a huge loss in efficiency and economic growth, which in other institutional settings could have been avoided.
India's recent growth rate has been impressive, with real GDP rising by over 8 percent a year since 2004. The country is also becoming a top global innovator for high-tech products and services. Still, India is underperforming relative to its innovation potential. Even a dynamic young population--more than half of whom are under 25 years of age--is constrained when skills training and higher education are insufficient. To sustain competitiveness, economic growth, and rising living standards over the long term, India needs to aggressively harness its innovation potential. The term innovation is broadly defined in this book to include both the creation and commercialization of new knowledge and the diffusion and absorption of existing knowledge in new contexts. A unique feature is the book's focus on inclusive innovation, that is, knowledge creation and absorption activities most relevant to the needs of the poor. Concrete recommendations are made for increasing productivity and welfare through the disciplining role of competition, including training and education, information infrastructure, and public and private finance as support mechanisms for broad-based innovation. Unleashing India's Innovation: Toward Sustainable and Inclusive Growth provides national and local policy makers, private sector enterprises, academic and research institutions, international organizations, and civil society with a better understanding of the power of innovation to fuel economic growth and poverty reduction.
In this paper we study convergence among Russian regions. We find that while there was no convergence in 1990s, the situation changed dramatically in 2000s. While interregional GDP per capita gaps still persist, the differentials in incomes and wages decreased substantially. We show that fiscal redistribution did not play a major role in convergence. We therefore try to understand the phenomenon of recent convergence using panel data on the interregional reallocation of capital and labor. We find that capital market in Russian regions is integrated in a sense that local investment does not depend on local savings. We also show that economic growth and financial development has substantially decreased the barriers to labor mobility. We find that in 1990s many poor Russian regions were in a poverty trap: potential workers wanted to leave those regions but could not afford to finance the move. In 2000s (especially in late 2000s), these barriers were no longer binding. Overall economic development allowed even poorest Russian regions to grow out of the poverty traps. This resulted in convergence in Russian labor market; the interregional gaps in incomes, wages and unemployment rates are now below those in Europe. The results imply that economic growth and development of financial and real estate markets eventually result in interregional convergence.
Economic crisis started in 2008 forced companies in Russia to move from growth and expansion to reduction and restructuring. The article presents the main changes at top managers’ labor market from the beginning of crisis in Russia. The original data on top managers’ mobility in Russia from late 1999 till 2009 was used. The main result of the research is that there were no big changes in Russian top managers’ labor market during the crisis years (2008–2009). The most significant change was the increase of firm’s demand for specific human capital of top managers and the decrease of demand for general human capital.
The economic crisis has uncovered three negative Russian tendencies that created institutional obstacles for market economy growth during the last decade: deepening of raw materials specialization, wear and tear of the equipment, gap in scientific and technical progress, and strengthening of the government. To stop these negative tendencies and overcome economic crisis it is necessary to reform developed institutes.
The major problem of the Russian economy is its low performance level. Overcoming development gap in comparison with developed countries will become possible only with the help of innovations. This means that process of generating and using Schumpeterian-type innovations should become the key factor of economic development. It is necessary to note that innovative activity of businessmen can be present in various forms. Depending on existing game rules business activity can get not only productive (J. A. Schumpeter’s creative destruction), but also unproductive (rent seeking) orientation.
The “Concept 2020” analyses the global challenges which Russia faces in its development that amplify high level of social inequality and regional differentiation, preservation of barriers to conducting enterprise activity, weak interrelation of education, science and business, absence of necessary competition in various markets and low level of social capital development. Under these conditions, as A. Gerschenkron wrote, the government becomes the leading factor of economic modernization, and it is its representatives that try to shape the concept of long-term socio-economic development of the country.
It is supposed that gross national product growth will be provided, mainly, by means of priority development of labour productivity and large capital assets investments. Our calculations show they considerably advance growth of productivity and gross national product, and that will lead to increase in a capital intensity of production and falling yield on capital investment. The arising gap between export and import, according to authors of the Concept, will be covered by the accruing inflow of foreign capital.
However the main drawback is the mechanism of maintaining economic growth. Defining concrete aims of development is an important, but an insufficient condition. The institutional mechanism of private sector development stimulation is not developed at all. Meanwhile, sharp increase of expenses on social sphere will raise the question about budget spending. It can be reached either by increase in taxes or by public sector expansion.
In the report it is critically considered not only the official point of view, but also Porter M., Ketels K. “Competitiveness at the Crossroads: Choosing the Future Direction of the Russian Economy”, «The forecast of innovative, technological and structural dynamics of Russian economy till 2030», and RAND Corporation report “The Global Technology Revolution 2020: Trends, Drivers, Barriers, and Social Implications” devoted to tendencies of development of 16 technologies in 29 countries and other forecasts.
In this paper we analyze institutional preconditions and possibilities of application of the concept of social market economy in the 21st century Russia. Basic elements of social market economy are personal liberty, social justice, and economic efficiency.
Personal liberty assumes trust strengthening between agents, development of guarantees of private property, and regular economic policy promoting freedom.
With social justice present market economy promotes social development and strengthens middle class. Democracy will allow to break administrative barriers and to create public control. Social justice also includes address support of vulnerable regions of Russia.
Economic efficiency should be directed towards creation and maintenance of competitive order, strengthening of antimonopoly activity and improving fair entrepreneur’s image. This will make Russia more attractive for workers from abroad and help it develop integrative relations with neighboring countries.
All these measures will raise economic efficiency while creating preconditions for a fast overcoming of the crisis and increasing the well-being and the acceleration of economic development of Russia.
Institutions affect investment decisions, including investments in human capital. Hence institutions are relevant for the allocation of talent. Good market-supporting institutions attract talent to productive value-creating activities, whereas poor ones raise the appeal of rent-seeking. We propose a theoretical model that predicts that more talented individuals are particularly sensitive in their career choices to the quality of institutions, and test these predictions on a sample of around 95 countries of the world. We find a strong positive association between the quality of institutions and graduation of college and university students in science, and an even stronger negative correlation with graduation in law. Our findings are robust to various specifications of empirical models, including smaller samples of former colonies and transition countries. The quality of human capital makes the distinction between educational choices under strong and weak institutions particularly sharp. We show that the allocation of talent is an important link between institutions and growth.
One of the basic factors of economic growth in the information knowledge - based economy is the innovation component determined by the level of intellectual capital usage. Of the specifics in the usage of intellectual capital is that the cost evaluation of intellectual resources on the macro-level as a factor of economic growth is extremely difficult and there are more evaluation possibilities on the micro-level. The risk's estimation based on making use of discount theory.