Izvestiya of Saratov University.

Economics. Management. Law

ISSN 1994-2540 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1956 (Online)
Full text PDF(Ru):
PDF icon ekonomika_2020_4_374-383.pdf
(downloads: 0)
Language: 
Russian
Heading: 
Economic
Article type: 
Article
UDC: 
338.45
DOI: 
10.18500/1994-2540-2020-20-4-374-383

Institutional Component of the Industrial Policy of the Russian Federation: Features and Problems of Formation

Autors: 
Starikov Yevgeniy Nikolaevich, Ural State University of Economics
Ramenskaya Liudmila A., Ural State University of Economics
Abstract: 

Introduction. For Russia, the development of an effective industrial policy is a response to the challenge of maintaining competitiveness and increasing the productivity of the country’s industrial complex. The study aims to identify and systematize the prerequisites and limitations of industrial development in the context of the institutional component of industrial policy. Theoretical analysis. We have considered the historical transformation of views on industrial policy, identified resource-industry and institutional approaches to industrial policy, and justified their differences. Based on the literature review the specific features of the institutional environment of Russia have been summarized: path dependence of previous development, weakness of institutions, institutional traps, distorting market signals. Empirical analysis. The analysis of statistical information made it possible to substantiate that over the past decades, Russia has deepened its raw material specialization, while there are some positive changes regarding the quality of the institutional environment. The analysis of the features of the institutional component of industrial policy made it possible to identify the following turning points: the creation of the Presidential Council on the modernization of the economy and innovative development of Russia; the adoption of a law on industrial policy; the modification of the system of central executive bodies and the improvement of their interaction; creation of infrastructure of the Industrial Development Funds. At the same time, a number of restrictions on the institutional environment have been identified. The most significant are: the formal and contradictory nature of the strategic planning of industrial development, duplication of powers and contradictions between formal institutions of state power, the creation of a system of “incomplete” regulation. Results. The analysis has revealed that effective institutes for the development of industrial policy have not yet been formed, despite the permanently changing institutional environment. The thesis on situational and institutional component of the fragmentation of the existing industrial policy has been confirmed.

Key words: 
industry
industrial policy
Institutional approach
Reference: 
  1. Hills J. Information Technology and Industrial Policy. London, Routledge, 2018. 371 р.
  2. Owen G. Industrial policy in Europe since the Second World War: what has been learnt? ECIPE Occasional Paper, 2012, no. 1. Available at: https://ecipe.org/publications/industrial-policy-europe-second-world-war... (accessed 20 May 2020).
  3. Lin J. New Structural Economics: A Framework for Rethinking Development. World Bank Research Observer, 2011, vol. 26, iss. 2, pp. 193−221.
  4. Aiginger K., Rodrik D. Rebirth of Industrial Policy and an Agenda for the Twenty-First Century. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 2020, no. 20, pp. 189−207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-019-00322-3
  5. Starikov Y. N., Ramenskaya L. A. International experience in the formation and implementation of industrial policy. Regional Economics: Theory and Practice, 2020, vol. 18, no. 2 (473), pp. 249−264 (in Russian).
  6. Federico G., Foreman-Peck J. European industrial policy: Introduction. In: J. Foreman-Peck, G. Federico (eds.). European industrial policy: The twentieth-century experience. New York, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 1−17.
  7. Graham O. L. Losing Time: The Industrial Policy Debate. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1994. 370 p.
  8. Pack H., Saggi K. The case for industrial policy: A crusial survey. Available at: https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-3839 (accessed 18 May 2020).
  9. Rodrick D. Industrial Policy for the Twenty-First Century. Available at: https://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu/files/dani-rodrik/files/industrial-p... (accessed 18 May 2020).
  10. Cimoli M., Dosi G., Stiglitz J. E. Industrial Policy and Development: The Political Economy of Capabilities Accumulation. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009. 143 p.
  11. Tatarkin A. I., Romanova O. A. Industrial policy: Genesis, regional features and legislative support. Economy of Region, 2014, no. 2, pp. 9–21 (in Russian).
  12. Zavadnikov V. About the industrial policy of the Russian Federation. Obschestvo i ekonomika [Society and Economics], 2007, no. 2–3, pp. 5–39 (in Russian).
  13. Coase R. H. The Institutional Structure of Production. American Economic Review, 1992, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 713–719.
  14. Coase R. H. The New Institutional Economics. American Economic Review, 1998, vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 72–74.
  15. Williamson O. E. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York, Free Press, 1985. 450 p.
  16. Williamson O. E. The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead. Journal of Economic Literature, 2000, Vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 595–613.
  17. North D. Institutions and economic growth: A historical introduction. World Development, 1989, vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 1319–1332.
  18. North D. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1990. 160 p.
  19. North D. Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspective, 1991, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 97–112.
  20. Polterovich V. Institutional Trap. In: L. E. Blume, S. N. Durlauf (eds.). The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2017, pp. 1–7. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311907319_Institutional_Trap (accessed 12 April 2020).
  21. Smallbone D., Welter F. Conceptualising entrepreneurship in a transition context. Int. J. Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 2006, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 190–206.
  22. Nureyev R. M. Russia after the crisis – Path Dependence. Zhurnal institutsional’nykh issledovaniy – Journal of institutional studies, 2010, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 7–26 (in Russian).
  23. Bessonova E., Gonchar K. Bypassing weak institutions in a large late-comer economy. Journal of Institutional Economics, 2015, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 847–874.
  24. Aidis R., Estrin S., Mickiewicz T. Institutions and Entrepreneurship Development in Russia: A Comparative Perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 2008, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 656–672. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.005
  25. Gurvich E. Institutional constraints and economic development. Russian Journal of Economics, 2016, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 349–374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruje.2016.11.002
  26. Rossiya v tsifrakh. 2019. Kratkiy statisticheskiy sbornik [Russia in numbers. 2019. Brief statistical compilation]. Moscow, Rosstat Publ., 2019. 549 p. (in Russian).
  27. The Global Competitiveness Index. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/ (accessed 12 May 2020).
  28. Vinslav Y. B. Industrial and Innovative Policy in the System of Public Administration: The Latest Modernization Problrms and Approaches to Their Solution. Rossiyskiy ekonomicheskiy zhurnal [Russian Economic Journal], 2018, no. 3, pp. 3–27 (in Russian).
  29. Gosudarstvennaya duma (State Duma. Site). Available at: http://www.gosduma.net/legislative/statistics/ (accessed 12 May 2020).
Received: 
25.08.2020
Accepted: 
27.10.2020
Available online: 
30.11.2020