The authors examine the dynamics of regional budgets performance key indicators, including analysis of "May decrees" implementation effects. Interregional differentiation of budget deficit levels is regarded in details. The article contains estimation of the impact of various factors on regional budget performance, and the analysis of the relationship between budget balance and budget debt.
The article discusses the current stage of economic development in Russia. In particular, the authors analyze the problems caused by both the inefficiencies accumulated during the previous years, and the deterioration of the external conditions in 2014. They also stress the factors that can support and prevent the restructuring of the Russian economy and its further growth. In conclusion they list economic policy scenarios appropriate for the new situation.
The article provides comparative analysis of the effectiveness of budget spending in Russia and OECD countries and examines the relation between effectiveness and the structure of budget expenditures. Effectiveness evaluation is based on the integral index, which includes a set of performance indicators for a number of areas and functions of budget expenditures: administrative, education, health, infrastructure, income distribution, stabilization and distribution of public goods. According to the results, in terms of the effectiveness of public sector expenditures Russia currently performs worse than all OECD countries, except Greece, and Lithuania.
This study examines the impact of public expenditure on economic growth in Russia. Fiscal multipliers for various items of government spending are calculated by means of our macroeconomic model of the Russian economy. Resources for fiscal stimulus and optimization are analyzed. In this study we assess Russia's fiscal sustainability in conditions of various levels of oil prices. We conclude that fiscal stimulus is ineffective in Russia, while fiscal sustainability in conditions of a sharp drop in oil prices is relatively low.
The article discusses the issues of measuring the effectiveness of budget expenditures on the basis of international comparisons using the DEA method . Macroeconomic (Musgrevian) indicators as well as sectoral performance indicators in relation to administrative expenditures, education and healthcare were used. Expenditure indicators were the share of budget expenditures in GDP and indicators of expenditure on education and health care per capita. We assess the integral efficiency of budget expenditures, based simultaneously on macro economic and sectoral indicators, as well as separately the effectiveness of expenditures on health care and education. In the DEA efficiency calculations, models with one performance indicator and one type of input and models with several types of costs and benefits were used. It is noted that when calculating integral efficiency, the highest results were achieved during the two periods under consideration by countries both with high results and with a low level of costs, the same applies to calculations of sectoral efficiency. When calculating comparative efficiency, the most favorable results for Russia are related to the calculations of the effectiveness of budget expenditures for education (secondary one). According to the first model of calculations based on DEA, Russia and three other countries are at the efficiency frontier in a sample of 41 countries. It is also noted that Russia's results in education are higher than in the countries with a similar level of spending.
The article is devoted to the problems of relationship between public expenditures and economic growth and methodical and practical problems of estimating expenditures efficiency. The authors note that productive expenditures (expenditures on human capital, social and economic infrastructure, research and development) have strong influence on economic growth. The comparative study of the effectiveness and efficiency of public expenditures was conducted, including productive expenditures (education and healthcare), for Russia and the sample of countries close to Russia by their economic development level. The indicators of the effectiveness and efficiency, econometric models, DEA method, and effectiveness and efficiency rankings based on them are used as measuring instruments in the study. According to the approach applied in the study, the rankings show relatively poor results for Russia in macroeconomic function performance of the public sector, in comparison to the other countries of the sample, but it is worth noting that the aggregated estimates are influenced by the selection of time period. Russia shows high results in education public expenditures efficiency and relatively poor results in healthcare public expenditures efficiency. Also, the productive expenditures level is low in Russia compared to the other countries close to Russia by their economic development level and OECD countries. This can limit economic growth in the mid-term and long-term prospects.
The article shows the main stages and results of the economic development in Russia since the early 1990s. It describes the process of formation and the basic features of a three-sector economic model, as well as the reasons for its stability and existing constraints to economic growth. The authors consider the most likely scenario for the evolution of the current economic model under conditions of a steady decline in export revenues. They also focus on fiscal and social risks and alternatives in economic policy.
Over the quarter of the century that has passed since the beginning of the market reforms, Russia managed to gain a more solid stance in the global economy. However, during that time Russia could not completely abandon archaic social forms like those of power-and-submission or "limited access order", as in D. North's concept. The article analyzes how these social patterns, replicating themselves, limit the opportunities for the transition to a new stage of economic development - the one that does not predominantly rely on the access to the oil- and-gas or administrative rent, but is based on productivity and efficiency growth.
Given the present level of institutional quality and the significant role of the government sector in the economy, the Russian Federation has depleted the potential of the current model of growth which is based on commodity exports. The dramatic deceleration of the GDP growth rate down to less than 2% in the end of 2012 and the beginning of 2013 bears the evidence to this proposition. At the moment, the government considers the choice between expansionist and conservative scenarios, which both lie on the assumption of long-term conservation of existing imperfect institutions. However, according to our estimates, it is impossible to create a new model of growth ignoring the role of private initiative, healthy institutions of market economy and investment in human capital. We distinguish two groups that are increasing their influence nowadays and can potentially become the driving force of a new model of Russian economic growth: "new business", dynamic companies that are oriented at the development in the market conditions but lack incentive to invest within existing institutional framework; "new bureaucracy", consisting of progressive regional elites, who are interested in the development of their area, and efficient professionals of the federal level.
The primary goal of this paper is to confirm the existence of the links and receive the quantitative measurement of the correlation between the quality of institutions and dynamics of their development, on the one hand, and GDP growth, on the other. For this analysis the extended database consisting of basic macroeconomic indicators and indices of quality of institutions for 51 countries for the period 2001-2009 was used. This study provides quantitative support to the common notion that economic growth in the long run is affected by the quality of institutions. Though this numeric effect may be viewed as relatively small, in the medium run the accumulated gap in the growth rate caused by permanently lower quality of institutions can be substantial. Moreover, the radical improvement in the quality of institutions provides more significant, though not lasting, addition to the growth rate.
Overall overview of current economic situation in Russia and in the world and possible scenarios of future economic development are presented in the paper. The analysis of GDP slowdown factors shows that the fall in excess inventories, accumulated in 2007—2008, accounts for more than 2/3 of GDP reduction in Russia. It is noted that instruments used by the government are weakening each other and do not allow to achieve internal and external equilibrium simultaneously in the future. Two possible anti-crisis economic policies (which are also behind the differences in two scenarios) are considered — countercyclical and anti inflation ones, their advantages and drawbacks are examined. The conclusion is made that countercyclical policy is now more favorable, which seems also to be a government choice. Nevertheless, anti-inflation policy directed to shrink monopolies power is necessary in both scenarios.
The inflation dynamics is a key factor in macroeconomic and social stability, having a direct impact on all structural proportions in the economy and the well-being of the population. This is especially noticeable during periods of acute shocks and crises. This article is an attempt to understand the inflationary consequences of the recent non-economic crisis associated with the coronavirus pandemic. The global nature of this crisis, as well as its impact on all sectors of the economy and spheres of economic relations, provide rich material for the analysis. The geopolitical aggravation and large-scale sanctions against Russia in 2022 have become a new shock for the entire economic system, creating a trail of new inflationary effects at the global level and especially within Russia. The presence of a significant number of similarities between the two crises retains the relevance of a rigorous analysis of the coronacrisis and its lessons, despite the radical change in the situation due to the onset of the sanctions crisis.
The issues to be discussed at the panel included: can past experience of economy recovery following crises of 1998 and 2008 be helpful at present; what sectors were driving growth of the Russian economy in the last decade, and are they able to perform this role in the future; what growth rate is feasible in 2021; what amendments to the national projects aimed at boosting growth are likely. In addition to that the panel participants specified key factors affecting productivity and output trends in Russia, suggested ways to support economy in the course of "coronacrisis", and pointed out to economic policy measures that could accelerate economic growth.
The roundtable participants assessed the effects of the pandemic and analyzed its consequences, the impact on economic and social development. The main attention in the discussion was paid to the pace of economic recovery, anti-crisis mechanisms to support the economy in 2020, which can become systemic, aimed at stimulating investment activity, and suggest new approaches to solving social problems. The participants in the discussion proposed considering the possibility of strengthening the countercyclical nature of the fiscal rule, taking into account not only oil prices, but also other factors of economic activity. It was noted that investments in many sectors have increased, but mainly due to budgetary sources, the role of budgetary policy has also increased. During the pandemic, the role of the state has changed: it has become not only a source of funds, but also a guarantor of investments and social payments. However, the roundtable participants noted that this new role of the state should not be ensured by raising taxes.
