Structure and dynamics of the economy (Russia’s case). Evaluation of the economic forecast

• Authors: Davydenko Vladimir , Romashkina Gulnara , Lazutina Daria

Title variants

PL

Struktura i dynamika gospodarki (przypadek Rosji). Ocena prognoz gospodarczych

• Languages of publication: PL EN

Abstracts

PL

Artykułu koncentruje się na reinterpretacji roli rosyjskiego budżetu federalnego w realizacji polityki społeczno-gospodarczej kraju. Przyjęto założenie, że kluczowym aspektem agendy politycznej i intelektualnej jest przyszły wzrost gospodarczy kraju, jego jakość, źródła i stopień postępu. W artykule analizuje się prognozę Ministerstwa Rozwoju Gospodarczego Rosji na lata 2017-2019 (trzy scenariusze – podstawowy, podstawowy+ i docelowy). Główną ideą jest, że tempo wzrostu PKB (z podstawowego scenariusza) jest zbyt wysokie i zbyt optymistyczne: 2%. Ani Ministerstwo Rozwoju Gospodarczego, ani Ministerstwo Finansów Federacji Rosyjskiej nie wyjaśniają tak wysokiego tempa. Według Rosstat, tempo wzrostu PKB w I kwartale 2017 wyniosło jedynie 0,5%. Obecna polityka budżetowa cięć i akumulacja rezerw prowadzą do stagnacji. Przeprowadzono analizę korelacji głównych składników PKB (w latach 2006-2019). Okazało się, że najważniejszym czynnikiem decydującym o wzroście jest konsumpcja wewnętrzna. Spadek realnych dochodów do dyspozycji prowadzi bezpośrednio do spadku sprzedaży artykułów spożywczych i artykułów nieżywnościowych. Zmniejszenie dochodów sprzyja zróżnicowaniu społeczno-ekonomicznemu. Zgodnie z danymi rosyjskiego budżetu na lata 2017-2019, nastąpił spadek udziału wydatków na administrację publiczną, obronę i porządek publiczny na rzecz sektorów, które stanowią wstępne warunki wzrostu. Rosja wpada w pułapkę "długiego kryzysu". Przy niskim tempie wzrostu gospodarczego zasoby państwa i społeczeństwa nie wystarczają do rozwiązania ważnych problemów społecznych, zmniejszenia ubóstwa i rozwoju infrastruktury. Nie ma wystarczających zasobów na modernizację produkcji technologicznej. Wpływa to na stopniową utratę zdolności technologicznych, kapitału ludzkiego, spadek konkurencyjności, spadek kursu rubla i destabilizację bilansu płatniczego.

EN

The research of this article is reinterpretation of the role of the Russian federal budget in the implementation of socio-economic policy of the country. Research question is based on the premise that a key moment of political and intellectual agenda is the future economic growth of the country, its quality, its sources and its progress rate. This article analysis the forecast of Ministry of Economic Development of Russia in the 2017-2019 (three scenarios – a basic, basic+ and target). The main idea is that the GDP growth rate (from the basic scenario) is too high and too optimistic: 2%. Neither the Economic Development Ministry, nor the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation explain such high rate. According to Rosstat, the 1Q 2017 GDP growth rate was only 0.5%. Current budgetary policy of cuts and accumulation of reserves leads to stagnation. The correlation analysis of the main components of the GDP were conducted (for the period 2006-2019). It turned out that the most important factor determining growth is internal consumption. The decline in real disposable income leads directly to the decrease in food and nonfood products sales. The reducing of income goes along with increasing of socio-economic differentiation. According to the data of Russia's budget for 2017-2019 years, there has been a decline in the share of spending on public administration, defense and public order in favor of the sectors that form the preconditions of growth. Russia falls into the trap of "long crisis". At low rates of economic growth, the state and society’s resources are not enough to solve important social problems, to reduce poverty and to develop the infrastructure. There is not enough resources for technological production modernization. It influence a gradual loss of technological capacity, human capital, competitiveness decline, the ruble’s exchange rate, and the destabilization of the payments’ balance.

Keywords

PL

PKB; prognozy; rozwój

EN

GDP; forecast; development

• Publisher: Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne w Zielonej Górze
• Journal: Zeszyty Naukowe Polskiego Towarzystwa Ekonomicznego w Zielonej Górze
• Year: 2017
• Issue: 7
• Pages: 97-119; 96-118

Contributors

author

Davydenko Vladimir

• Tyumen State University

author

Romashkina Gulnara

• Tyumen State University

author

Lazutina Daria

• Tyumen State University

References

• Akindinova N., Kondrashov N., Cherniavsky A. (2016), Thirteen ways to carry out budget consolidation. Comments on the state and business, The Institute "Development Center" NRU "Higher School of Economics", pp. 12-29.
• Aleksashenko S. (2016), The desired and the possible: what can be done with the Russian economy in 2017, RBC 27 Dec 2016.
• Aschauer D.A. (1990), Public investment and private sector growth, Economic Policy Institute, Washington DC.
• Barro R.J. (1990), Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth', “Journal of Political Economy”, vol. 98, pp. 103-125.
• Block F. (1990), Postindustrial possibilities: A critique of economic discourse, University of California Press.
• Block F. (2010), Revising state theory: Essays in politics and postindustrialism. Temple University Press.
• Buchanan J. (1997), Compositions. Per. from English. Series: “Nobel laureates in Economics”, vol. 1, Fund Economic Initiatives; CH. ed. Count, Nureyev RM, Moscow, Taurus Alfa.
• Burawoy M., Lukács J. (1992), The radiant past: Ideology and reality in Hungary's road to capitalism, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
• Burawoy M. (2001), Neoclassical Sociology: From the End of Communism to the End of Classes1, “American Journal of Sociology”, no. 106 (4), pp. 1099-1120.
• Chandler A., Amatori E., Hikino T. (1997), Big Business and the Wealth of Nations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Cowen T. (2013), Average is over. Dutton Adult.
• Dmitriev M.E. (2016), Analysis of the factors affecting implementation of strategic planning documents at the top level, Analytical report. Saint-Petersburg, http://polit.ru/media/files/2016/12/27/Report-on-strategy.pdf, (access: 25.10.2016).
• Dobbin F. (2016), Comparative and historical approaches to economic sociology, “Economic Sociology”, no. 17(3).
• Dobbin F. (2012), Forging industrial policy: the United States, Britain and France in the railway industry, “Economic Sociology”, no. 13(5).
• Evans P.B. (1995), Embedded autonomy: states and industrial transformation, vol. 25., Princeton University Pres, Princeton, New York.
• Explanatory note to the Federal draft law On the Federal budget for 2017, 2018 and 2019, http://government.ru/activities/selection/301/25074/, (access: 25.10.2016).
• Fligstein N. (2007), The state, markets, and economic growth, ”Economic Sociology”, 8(2).
• Fligstein N. (2013), The architecture of markets: an economic sociology of capitalist societies of the XXI century, “Economic Sociology”, no. 14(3).
• Gurevich V. (2016), Monitoring of Russia's Economic Outlook. Trends and Challenges of Socio-Economic Development, no. 16 (34).
• Hannan M.T., Freeman J. (1984), Structural inertia and organizational change. “American Sociological Review”, pp. 149-164.
• Harvey D. (1989), The postmodern condition: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change, Blackwell.
• Hedlund S. (2015), Invisible hands, Russian experience and social science. Ways of explaining the system failure, State University Higher School of Economics, Moscow.
• Herschenkron A. (1962), The approach to European industrialization: a postscript. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective, Harvard University Press, pp. 355-64.
• Higley J., Lengyel G. (2000), Elites after state socialism: Theories and analysis. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Jessop B. (1990), State theory: Putting the capitalist state in its place, Penn State Press.
• Jessop B. (1995), The regulation approach, governance and post-Fordism: alternative perspectives on economic and political change?, “Economy and Society”, no. 24(3), pp. 307-333.
• Kaźmierczyk J. (2015), Konsensus Poznański i Konsensus Azjatycki – jak daleko do Konsensusu Waszyngtońskiego? Analiza porównawcza. Pierwsze spostrzeżenia, in: Pietraszkiewicz K. (ed.), Sektor finansowy: stymulatory i zagrożenia rozwoju, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, Warszawa, pp. 222-239.
• Kolodko G.V. (2014), Whither the world: political economy of the future, Moscow, Magistr.
• Lapin N.I. (2005), Antroposocietal approach: the methodological grounds of sociological measurement, “Questions of Philosophy”, (2), pp. 17-29.
• Lash S., Urry J. (1987), The end of organized capitalism, University of Wisconsin Press.
• Maddison A. (1995), Explaining the economic performance of nations, Book.
• Marsh P. (2015), A new industrial revolution. Consumers, globalization and the end of mass production, Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, Moscow.
• North D., Wallis D., Weingast B. (2011), Violence and social orders. A conceptual framework for interpreting recorded human history, Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, Moscow.
• Nureev R.M. (2015), Development Economics: models of establishing market economy: Textbook, “Bulletin of the Center for international education of Moscow State University, Philology. Cultural studies. Pedagogy. The technique”, (4), pp. 49-54.
• Official statements from the Russian Finance Ministry's website: http://minfin.ru/ru/perfomance/budget/federal_budget/budj_rosp/, (access: 25.10.2016).
• Polanyi's K. (2002), Economics as institutionally formed process, “Economic Sociology”, no. 3(2).
• Radaev V.V. (2008), Economic Sociology, Ed. House State. University – Higher School of Economics, 2nd ed. , Moscow.
• Ritchie J., Lewis, J., Nicholls C.M., Ormston R. (eds.) (2013), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers, Sage.
• Romer P. (1990), Endogenous Technological Change, “Journal of Political Economy”. vol. 98, pp. 79-102.
• Russia and the World: 2010. Annual Forecast: Economy and Foreign Policy Project leads. A.A. Dynkin, V.G. Baranovskii, IMEMO RAN, 2010, Moscow.
• Russia and the World: 2016. Annual Forecast: Economy and Foreign Policy Project leads A.A. Dynkin, V.G. Baranovskii, IMEMO RAN, 2016, Moscow.
• Sokolov I. (2016), Federal budget for 2017-2019: what they say, its basic parameters, Monitoring of the economic situation in Russia. Trends and challenges for socio-economic development, no. 16 (34), pp. 6-14.
• Stevenson P., Burawoy M., Skocpol T. (1985), Marxist Inquiries: Studies of Labor, Class and States, University of Chicago Press.
• Temin P., Vines D. (2015), The Economy without a leader. Why crumbled the world economic system and how to collect it, Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, Moscow.
• The materials of the Russian State Committee of Statistics (2016), http://www.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_main/rosstat/ru/statistics/accounts/, (access: 25.10.2016).
• The project of the main characteristics of the federal budget 2017-2019, the calculations of the Institute “Development Center” (2016), The Russian Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Economic Development. Higher School of Economics, Moscow.
• http://government.ru/activities/selection/301/25074/, (access: 25.10.2016).
• The report on the Russian economy. From recession to recovery. The 37th edition of the World Bank (2017), 64 p., http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/383241495487103815/RER-37- May26-FINAL-with-summary.pdf, (access: 22.6.2017).
• Tickell A., Peck J.A. (1992), Accumulation, regulation and the geographies of post-Fordism: missing links in regulationist research, “Progress in Human Geography”, no. 16(2), pp. 190-218.
• Tyson L. (1992), Who is Bashing Whom. Trade Conflict in High-Technology Industries, Washington DC, Institute of International Economics, 1992, no. 4(9).
• Voslensky M.S. (1991), Item. The ruling class of the Soviet Union, Moscow, "Soviet Russia" joint. with MP "October".
• Weber M. (1978), Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology, vol. 1, University of California Press, Berkeley.
• Wright E.O. (2005), Foundations of a neo-Marxist class analysis. Approaches to class analysis, in: Wright E.O. (ed.), Approaches to Class Analysis, Cambridge University Press, pp. 4-30.

Identifiers

ISSN

2391-7830

DOI

10.26366/PTE.ZG.2017.103