Постшоковый рост российской экономики. Опыт кризисов 1998 и 2008 гг. и взгляд в будущее
The global economy passes the COVID-19 related crises. For various projections, the output fall in Russia in 2020 will vary from 2 to 8 percent. So, in comparison with the crises of 1998 and 2008, the current shock can be more severe. In the upcoming years the Russian economy will pass the recovery stage, approaching the new balanced growth path. What proximate sources would push this growth?
With the neoclassical industry growth accounting and the Russia KLEMS dataset the present report aims to shed light on this, considering the growth patterns and sources of growth after the crises of 1998 and 2008. The report unveils the most important sources of the after-2008 stagnation in Russia, which are the decreasing efficiency of the extended oil and gas sector and the suspension of technology convergence. Since the recovery in Russia will be, most probably, caused by the increasing demand on energy and raw materials, driven by the recovery of global markets, policy implications for Russia should include efforts to improve efficiency in such export-oriented sectors, as oil and gas, and efforts, which aim to boost technology convergence such as backing export-oriented firms, which have been integrated to global value chains.
In recent years, key users of macroeconomic performance indicators have advocated increasing the availability of more detailed productivity statistics. In particular, expanding growth accounts to the industry level to meet the need for more granular measures of economic performance. In response to this, Australia and Russia have developed estimates of industry level KLEMS (Capital (K), Labor (L), Energy (E), Materials (M) and Services (S)) productivity growth. The chapter considers the progress of Australia and Russia KLEMS projects in terms of data construction and the usage of KLEMS for better understanding of industry sources of growth. For both countries, at least two decades of KLEMS data are now available, supporting more in-depth analysis of the determinants of growth at the industry level.
This work contains an express answer to four questions about what happened in the higher education system at the very beginning of the introduction of quarantine measures: (1) how have universities and the states reacted worldwide? (2) what are the reaction of Russian universities? (3) how do students and teachers perceive the situation? (4) Is there enough infrastructure to implement quarantine measures of remote work and training?
Most of the analytics were collected on an initiative basis, but the most important sections were written on the basis of data collected within the working group of the Russian Ministry of Education and Science to organize educational activities in the context of preventing the spread of COVID-19 infection in the Russian Federation under the leadership of the Department of Youth Policy (in terms of sociological student survey) and the Department of Information Technology in the field of science and higher education (in terms of monitoring infrastructure and opportunities Translation courses in distance learning). Data collection and analysis would not have been possible without cooperation with MIREA, as well as representatives of ITMO University, Ural Federal University, Tomsk State University and support from Mail.ru Group and the Association of Volunteer Centers.
The Arctic Council is well-positioned to play a leadership role in better understanding the impact of Covid-19 in the Arctic and spearheading activities to respond to the pandemic in the short-, medium- and longer-term. This briefing document was prepared to inform initial discussions regarding the coronavirus pandemic in the Arctic at the Senior Arctic Officials’ executive meeting (SAOX) on 24-25 June 2020. It draws together available information – to date (June 2020) – about the impact of Covid-19 in the Arctic: Briefing Document for SAOs June 2020 For public release Page 10 of 83 Covid-19 and the actions taken to respond in the Arctic region. The document draws from a wide spectrum of sources, reflecting the complex and intricate nature of how Covid-19 affects Arctic peoples and communities, including national and subnational statistical databases and tools, peer-reviewed articles, policy statements, technical guidelines, field surveys, and local observations from Arctic communities.
All world upward trends and cycles have a lot in common while crises significantly differ. In the case of this research the recession was sparked not by the shock of financial sector but by the restrictions imposed on consumption that previously was not inclined to fluctuate that much. Oil price shock has increased negative influence on the world energy market and economy overall. The decline in employment and personal consumption has struck more on most vulnerable social classes but the decreased volume of demand can be also attributed to the wealth (catering, tourism and others). Once began, the recession develops by its own rules — a sharp fall in the world trade, fixed capital formation, growth of budget deficits, and particularly strong impact on developing countries most dependent on tourism and financial assistance.
Keywords: pandemic, coronavirus, COVID-19, business cycle, social inequality, personal consumption, capital formation, finance.
JEL: A14, D11, F02, T32.
This study considers the influence of structutal change to aggregate labour productivity growth of the Russian economy. The term “structural change” refers to labour reallocation both between industries and between formal and informal segments within an industry. Using Russia KLEMS and official Rosstat data we decompose aggregate labour productivity growth into intra-industry (within) and between industry effects with four alternative methods of the shift share analysis. All methods provide consistent results and demonstrate that total labour reallocation has been growth enhancing though the informality expansion has had the negative effect. As our study suggests, it is caused by growing variation in productivity levels across industries.
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.