ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT

The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 1/2024. Economics and Management.

Dmitriy V. Agafonov

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Deputy Director of the Centre for Economic Research of Infrastructure Industries of the Natural Monopoly Economies Institute, RANEPA, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0001-7217-2256

Oksana O. Mozgovaya

Director of the Centre for Organization of Scientifi c Activity and Project Management of the Natural Monopoly Economies Institute, RANEPA, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0001-6556-2459

Boris I. Fayn

Director of the Centre for Economic Research of Infrastructure Industries of the Natural Monopoly Economies Institute, RANEPA, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0002-0891-4849

Vasiliy V. Kuznetsov

Lead expert of the Centre for Methodology and Forensic Economic Analysis of the Natural Monopoly Economies Institute, RANEPA, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0003-4853-1698

ASSESSING THE RESULTS AND PROSPECTS FOR INTRODUCING YARDSTICK REGULATION IN THE ELECTRIC POWER INDUSTRY

87-112

493.25 KB

Full text

Abstract

Since 2018, the electric power industry has been undergoing an evolutionary restructuring of approaches to the formation of regulated tariffs. In particular, the government of the Russian Federation passed a decree introducing new rules of sales markups of GESs using the analogue comparison method. It provides for normalization of operating expenses. All participants in the electricity market and state executive authorities needed to reconfigure with reference of a radical transformation of approaches to tariff regulation. The authors of the article focus on the assessments lack of the reconfiguration results and the small volume of recommendations for expanding the use of yardstick regulation.

The article summarizes the results of the five-year period of the new tariff regulation approach of GESs. The authors also presented an assessment of the prospects for further use of the analogue comparison method in relation to electric grid enterprises. This was the purpose of the article.

To achieve this goal, the authors analyzed the results of the switch to the analogue comparison method. In particular, the article examines changes in sales markups: an increase in the sales markup median value of GESs has been revealed by 2–3 times since 2018, depending on the group of consumers. In conclusion, the authors proposed possible tools for adjusting and fine-tuning the method of analogues comparison in relation to the GESs activities. The article also gives the author's assessment of the prospects for expanding this method to other natural monopoly segments, including electricity transmission and distribution.

Keywords: guaranteeing electricity supplier, sales markups, tariff regulation, analogue comparison method, yardstick regulation.

JEL: D4, G38, L94, O25

EDN: LUSDVA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_ 2024_1_87_112

References

Vasilyev D.A. New in state regulation of electricity companies tariffs //Economy and Entrepreneurship. 2019. No. 9(110). Рp. 161–166.(In Russ.).
Rykova I., Taburov D. Tariff policy based on the analysis of the dynamics of regulated and free prices in the electricity sector //Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University. 2018. No. 5(68). Рp. 115–126. (In Russ.).
Vasilyev D.A. State Tariff and Antimonopoly Regulation of the Electric Power Complex: Institutional Aspect // Public Administration. E-journal (Russia).2023. No. 97. Рp. 85–97. (In Russ.).
Korolev V. Why do we need a yardstick regulation // Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 2018. October 08. https://www.ng.ru/ng_energiya/2018-10-08/12_7327_ princip.html (In Russ.).
Mozgovaya O.O., Sheval Yu.V., Kuznetsov V.V. Development of default electricity suppliers’ efficiency by the yardstick regulation // The Eurasian Scientific Journal. 2019. No. 5(11). https://esj.today/PDF/77ECVN519.pdf (In Russ.).
Frey D.A., Pavlenok A.A., Nestulaeva D.R. Improvement of Methods of Regulation of Sales Markups of Guaranteed Suppliers // The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology. 2020. No. 3. Рp. 40–46. (In Russ.).
Mozgovaya O.O. The yardstick competition and comparative method of electricity suppliers’ regulation: synonyms or not // The Eurasian Scientific Journal. 2019. No. 6(11). https://esj.today/PDF/17ECVN619.pdf. (In Russ.).
Agafonov D.V., Mozgovaya O.O. Assessment of modern approaches impact to the tariff policy formation on the default electricity suppliers financial and economic activities in RF // Bulletin of Moscow Witte University. Series 1: Economics and Management. 2022. No. 2(41). Рp. 15–25. (In Russ.).
Dolmatov I.A., Panova M.A. Tariff regulation using the reference cost method: expectations and reality // Energorynok. 2018. No. 3(158). Рp. 16–23. (In Russ.).
Mozgovaya O.O., Fain B.I. Interregional differentiation of sales markups of guaranteed (default) electricity suppliers before and after the switch to the method of analogues’ comparison // Public Administration Issues. 2023. No. 1. Рp. 120–149. (In Russ.).
Mozgovaya O.O., Sheval Yu.V. The establishment of sales markups of guaranteeing electricity suppliers by method of comparison of analogues: decrease or increase // Vestnik universiteta, 2019. No. 12. Рp. 119–125. (In Russ.).
Suyunchev M.M., Mozgovaya O.O., Kuznetsov V.V. The tariff effects research of comparative method for default electricity supplier’s regulation. (Preprint). M.: RANEPA, 2019. (In Russ.).

Manuscript submission date: 15.01.2024

For citation:

Agafonov D.V., Mozgovaya O.O., Fayn B.I., Kuznetsov V.V. Assessing the results and prospects for introducing yardstick regulation in the electric power industry // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2024. № 1. Pp. 87-112. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_1_87_112 EDN: LUSDVA

Creative Commons 4.0

Liliya I. Dmytrychenko

Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Head of the Department of Economic Theory, Donetsk State University, Donetsk, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0001-6956-8524

Inessa B. Avanesova

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor of the Department of General Economic Theory, The Moscow School of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0009-0005-6743-2259

SCIENCE AND EDUCATION AS AN OBJECT OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATE

65-86

358.4 KB

Full text

Abstract

The article examines the problem of the state’s social responsibility regarding the development of science and education in the country. University models are analyzed, as well as conceptual approaches to assessing the role and significance of modern education and science in various countries, including the Russian Federation. The current state of science is reflected, the dynamics of spending on scientific research in Russia is analyzed and an assessment of their levels in developed countries of the world is given. Problems and contradictions in the development of science and education in Russian society are formulated. The modern concept of state educational policy, which is being actively introduced into the scientific and educational practice of Russia provides a critical analysis. The authors come to the conclusion about the necessity to intensify the state’s stimulating policy in the field of science and education.

Keywords: state, science and education, national interests, social responsibility, fundamental nature of education, human capital.

JEL: О43, А14, В41

EDN: JRAIAE

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_1_65_86

References

Andreev A. National model of university education: emergence and development. // Higher education in Russia. 2005. No. 1. Рp. 156–169. (In Russ.).
Humboldtian model of higher education. https: //translated. turbopages. org/proxy_u/en-ru.ru.71da3503-655dfe18-4223624f74722d776562/https/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Humboldtian_model of_higher_education (accessed: 11.11.2023). (In Russ.).
Typology of universities, models and tools of organizational development: preprint / ed. V.S. Efimov. https://elib-sfu-kras.ru/handle/2311/144704 (accessed: 12.11.2023). Krasnoyarsk: Sib. federal univ., 2018. (In Russ.).
Nosonov A.M. Factors in the formation of entrepreneurial universities in Russia // Modern problems of science and education. 2020. No. 4. Р. 30. EDN: EMLLBU, DOI: 10.17513/spno.29978
Formation of a system of continuous business education in Russia: theory and practice: monograph. / Ross. econ. University named after G.V. Plekhanov; ed. V.I. Grishina. M.: Publishing house REU named after G.V. Plekhanov, 2018. (In Russ.).
Zakharov N.I. Behavioral economics, or why in Russia we want the best, but it turns out as always: monograph. / N.I. Zakharov. M.: INFRA-M, 2018. (In Russ.).
Stukalova I.B. Financial support for the competitiveness of Russian universities: monograph. / I.B. Stukalova [and others]. M.: Rusayns, 2018. (In Russ.).
Continuing professional education as a basic factor in the formation of human resources: status, problems, development paths: monograph. / Ross. econ. University named after G.V. Plekhanov; V.M. Zuev [and others]. M.: Publishing house REU named after G.V. Plekhanov, 2018. (In Russ.).
Innovative integrated structures of education, science and business: monograph. / ed. A.V. Rozhdestvensky. M.: Alfa-M: INFRA-M, 2017. (In Russ.).
In search of new models of the financial market and educational activities: monograph. / E. G. Dadyan. Fin. University under the Government of Russian Federation. M.: University textbook: INFRA-M, 2018. (In Russ.).
Russian graduate students: selection, preparation for independent scientific and pedagogical activities: monograph. / S.D. Reznik, S.N. Makarova, E.S. Dzhevitskaya; General ed. S.D. Reznik. 2nd ed. M.: INFRA-M, 2017. (Scientific thought. Education). (In Russ.).
Russian youth in the labor market: economic activity and employment problems in a metropolis: monograph. / Scientific ed. V.N. Bobkov, A.A. Litvinyuk. M.: Rusayns, 2018. (In Russ.).
Strumilin S.G. Economic importance of public education / S.G. Strumilin. M.–L.: Economic Life, 1924. (In Russ.).
Knowledge management in corporations / B.Z. Milner [et al.]; ed. B.Z. Milner. M.: Delo, 2006. (In Russ.).

Manuscript submission date: 10.01.2024

For citation:

Dmitrychenko L.I., Avanesova I.B. Science and education as an object of social responsibility of the state // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2024. № 1. Pp. 65-86. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_1_65_86 EDN: JRAIAE

Creative Commons 4.0

The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 1/2024. Economics and Management.

Svetlana A. Bratchenko

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Leading Researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0002-5066-0678

INCONSISTENCY OF GOALS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS: SURVEY OF PRACTICES AND CASE STUDIES

28-46

323.9 KB

Full text

Abstract

The implementation of government programs often does not lead to the achievement of their strategic goals, to the solution of those socio-economic tasks for which they were developed. Based on the material of several state programs, the work shows that one of the significant causes of this problem is the inconsistency of the target parameters of state programs (indicators, measures, control events) with the strategic goals of these programs. The conducted research confirmed that in practice, the degree of consistency of indicators and measures (control events) of state programs with their strategic goals varies from program to program: a number of programs have approved irrelevant indicators that do not contribute to achieving the strategic goals of the relevant state programs. Another important reason for the failure to achieve both strategic and operational goals of government programs is the inconsistency of measures (control events) with the goals of government programs. The paper reveals the concept of inconsistency of goals in management, provides recommendations on the selection of agreed target parameters of government programs. A significant obstacle to improving the quality of government program management is the current methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of program implementation, according to which the main condition for the success of the implementation is the achievement of target values of indicators without taking into account the achievement of strategic goals.

Keywords: government program, strategic and operational goals, inconsistency of goals, achievability of goals, indicators, measures, control events, national goals.

JEL: B41, E61, H50, H83, L52, L62, L72, O25

EDN: FXOLFG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_1_28_46

References

Bratchenko S.A. Inconsistency of goals in public administration // Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2023. No. 6. Pp. 78–108. DOI: 10.52180/2073-6487_2023_6_78_108. EDN: KDHKXU.
Blokhin A.A., Adamyan E.A., Kitaev A.E., Mironova I.I. Comparative estimates of the parameters of the goals of the state and other subjects of management of the Russian economy // Bulletin of the Moscow University. Ser. 6. Economics. 2019. No. 2. Pp. 3–25. EDN: CDIDPT.
Bratchenko S.A. Quality of public administration: theoretical, methodological and institutional aspects: Report. M.: Institute of Economics RAS. 2021. EDN: TJSXWF.
Gumerov R.R., Guseva N.V., Solntseva L.I. Assessment of the quality of government programs: results of testing a multi-criteria model (results, problems, opportunities) // Management and business administration. 2021. No. 4. Pp. 28–38. DOI: 10.33983/20751826-2021-4-28-38. EDN: HZKJFF.
Pivovarova O.V. 2.2. Analysis of the implementation and evaluation of the effectiveness of state programs of the Russian Federation as a condition for ensuring effectiveness in the field of state property management // Development of Russia in a new reality: state and prospects: monograph / E.V. Sukhanov, E.A. Milovanov, V.N. Nemirov, et al. Voronezh: NAUKA-UNIPRESS; Voronezh State Pedagogical University, 2017. EDN: YOFLAD.
Shash N.N. Management of the effectiveness of state programs: methodological foundations for the development of a program budget // Manager. 2015. No. 1. Pp. 4–15. EDN: TKAUGT.
Yandiev M.I., Klimov E.B., Magomedova Yu.D., Tsechoev M.T. State programs of the city of Moscow: goals, deadlines, indicators // Russia and Asia. 2020. No. 5. Pp. 65–71. EDN: UYQCHM.
Naumov S.N., Sorokin I.A. Assessment of the state program of the Russian Federation “Scientific and technological development of the Russian Federation” for compliance with the national development goals of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2024 // Drucker’s Bulletin. 2020. No. 1. Pp. 168–182. DOI: 10.17213/2312-6469-2020-1168-182. EDN: CZLOOD.
Khotulev E.L., Naumov S.N., Blokhin A.A. New challenges of program-oriented management: search for answers and solutions. Moscow: VAVT, 2019. EDN: FVMORJ.
Bratchenko S.A. Institutional aspects of goal-setting in the development of state programs // Public Service. 2023. No. 5. Pp. 39–54. DOI: 10.22394/2070-8378-2023-25-5-39-54.
Glazyev S.Yu., Ivanter V.V., Makarov V.L., Nekipelov A.D., Tatarkin A.I., Grinberg R.S., et al. On the strategy for the development of the Russian economy // ENSR. No. 3(54). 2011. EDN: OIOUNP.
Lenchuk E.B., Filatov V.I., Akhapkin N.Yu., Smotritskaya I.I., et al. Formation of the digital economy in Russia: problems, risks, prospects / Ed.: E.B. Lenchuk. M.: Institute of Economics RAS, 2018. EDN: MUSYMD.
Gorodetsky A.E. Institutes of public administration in the context of new challenges of socio-economic development: Monograph. M.: Institute of Economics, RAS. 2018. EDN: SQEFMN.
Vinislav Yu.B. The year 2020: on the continuing reproductive threats and their neutrali zation on the ways to improve strategic planning and industrial policy, the deployment of the national innovation system and its sectoral and regional subsystems // Russian Economic Journal. 2020. No. 1. Pp. 4–53. DOI: 10.33983/0130-9757-2020-1-3-53. EDN: NCFUXI.
Khotulev E.L., Naumov S.N. State programs as a tool for implementing a new economic policy // New Economic policy for Russia and the world. Collection of scientific papers of the participants of the International Scientific Conference. XXVII Kondratiev readings. Ed. by V.M. Bondarenko. M.: International Public Organization for the Promotion of the Study and Promotion of the scientific Heritage of N.D. Kondratiev, 2019. Pp. 214–221. EDN: WHRJJR.

Manuscript submission date: 19.01.2024

For citation:

Bratchenko S.A. Inconsistency of goals in the development of government programs: survey of practices and case studies // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2024. № 1. Pp. 28-46. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_1_28_46 EDN: FXOLFG

Creative Commons 4.0

The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 1/2024. Economics and Management.

Oleg S. Sukharev

Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Chief Researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0002-3436-7703

TECHNOLOGICAL SOVEREIGNTY OF RUSSIA: FORMATION ON THE BASIS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE "KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY" SECTOR

47-64

465.68 KB

Full text

Abstract

The article is devoted to the issues of technological sovereignty of the Russian economy. The main condition for its provision is the targeted formation and development of the “knowledge economy” sector. An approach to measuring technological sovereignty in specific areas of technological development and types of economic activity is proposed. Based on the results of a regression analysis of the relationship between the costs of internal research and development and the gross added value of the “knowledge economy” sector, it has been established that there is a problem associated with the effectiveness of these costs and their subordination exclusively to the task of developing the knowledge economy. It is concluded that new approaches are needed to the formation of a knowledge economy, which should be significantly expanded primarily by increasing costs allocated to the development of new technologies, maintaining existing standard technological chains, and increasing the efficiency of these costs. The research methodology included empirical, comparative, structural and regression analysis, as well as the author’s developments in the field of quantitative measurements. The application of the author's methodology for assessing the “knowledge economy” in Russia on economic development is shown – in terms of scale and contribution to the growth rate.

Keywords: “knowledge economy”, technology, research and development costs, technological sovereignty, economic growth, measurement methods.

JEL: O11, O33, O41

EDN: GBHZQW

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_ 2024_1_47_64

References

Glazyev S.Yu. Theory of long-term technical and economic development. M.: VlaDar, 1993. (In Russ.).
Mensch G. Technological stalemate: innovation overcomes depression. M.: Economics, 2001. (In Russ.).
Perez K. Technological revolutions and financial capital. Dynamics of bubbles and periods of prosperity. M.: Publishing house “DELO”, 2011. (In Russ.).
Sukharev O.S. Economics of technological development. M.: Finance and Statistics, 2008. (In Russ.).
Sukharev O.S. Economics of industry, technology and intellectual firms. M.: Lenand, 2022. (In Russ.).
Helpman E. The mystery of economic growth. M.: Gaidar Institute Publishing House, 2011. (In Russ.).
Bassens D., Hendrikse R. Asserting Europe’s technological sovereignty amid American platform finance: Countering financial sector dependence on Big Tech? // Political Geography. 2022. 97(1):102648.
Breschi S., Malerba F., Orsenigo L. Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation // The Economic Journal. 2000. Vol. 110 (463). Pр. 388–410.
Caputo F. Reflecting upon knowledge management studies: insights from systems thinking // International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies. 2017. Vol. 8 (3–4), Рp. 177–190.
Caputo, F., Garcia-Perez, A., Cillo, V., & Giacosa, E. A knowledge-based view of people and technology: directions for a value co-creation-based learning organization // Journal of Knowledge Management. 2019. Vol. 23(7). Pр. 1314–1334.
Cheng M., Yang S., Wen Z. The effect of technological factors on industrial energy intensity in China: New evidence from the technological diversification // Sustainable Production and Consumption. 2021. Vol. 28. Pр. 775–785.
Crafts N. The First Industrial Revolution: Resolving the Slow Growth. Rapid Industrialization Paradox. Papers and Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Congress of the European Economic Association // Journal of the European Economic Association. 2005. Vol. 3. No. 2/3. Рp. 525–534.
Edler J., Blind K., Kroll H., Schubert T. Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy. Defining rationales, ends and means // Research Policy. 2023. 52(6):104765.
Lu Y. Industry 4.0: A survey on technologies, applications and open research issues // Journal of Industrial Information Integration. 2017. Vol. 6. Рp. 1–10.
Philbeck T., Davis T. The Fourth Industrial Revolution // Journal of International Affairs. 2019. Vol. 72. No. 1. Рp. 17–22.
Ponte A., Leon G., Alvarez I. Technological sovereignty of the EU in advanced 5G mobile communications: An empirical approach. Telecommunications Policy. 2023. 47(7):102459.
Rifkin J. The Third Industrial Revolution: How Lateral Power Is Transforming Energy, the Economy, and the World. St. Martin's Griffin Pbl, 2011.

Manuscript submission date: 13.12.2023

For citation:

Sukharev O.S. Technological sovereignty of Russia: formation on the basis of the development of the "knowledge economy" sector // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2024. №. 1 Pp. 47-64. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_ 2024_1_47_64 EDN: GBHZQW

Creative Commons 4.0

The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 1/2024. Economics and Management.

Evgeny M. Buchwald

Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Chief Researcher, Head of the Center for Federal Relations and Regional Development at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Igor S. Bessonov

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Assistant Professor of the Department of Economy, Organization and Enterprise Development Strategy, Samara State University of Economics, Samara, Russia

SUBREGIONS IN THE SPATIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION REGIONS

7-27

538.93 KB

Full text

Abstract

In recent years, a number of factors have emerged significantly focused attention on the problems and prospects for the development of Russian local self-government. This is the order of the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin regarding the preparation of the new foundations for state policy in the field of local self-government; the introduction of a draft law on the general principles of local self-government organization in the country and, finally, the active dissemination of new forms of territorial structuring in the regions, such as agglomerations, economic zoning, various subregional entities, etc. All these tendencies relate to possible modifications in the activities of local self-government institutions. Using the example of a number of regions of Russia, the article examines the attempts of the subjects of the Federation to make certain changes in the interregional territorial structure and management of economic and social processes in order to ensure full and effective use of the municipal level potencial and the advantages of intermunicipal cooperation.

Such innovations, in particular, are implemented as the formation of special subregions, which represent a territorial and economic phenomenon that is formed outside agglomerations and that establishes a system of sustainable intermunicipal economic interactions.

Keywords: municipal government, municipal reform, subregional territorial entities, government regulation, strategic planning.

JEL: O18, R12

EDN: DZWBTK

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_1_7_27

References

Bessonov I.S. Structuring of the economic space and methods of spatial analysis as the features of identifying the spatial potential of small enterprises. In the collection: The mechanism for implementing the strategy of socio-economic development of the state. A study of the 12th International Scientific Practical Conference (September 23–24, 2020) / edited by A.M. Esetova. Makhachkala: Dagestan State Technical University, Рp. 64–67. (In Russ).
Buchwald E.M., Voroshilov N.V., Kozhevnikov O.A. Local self-government: to reform, but not to destroy // Self-government. 2022. No. 1. Рp. 12–15. EDN: NKULFC. (In Russ).
Buchwald E.M. Federal reform: is a new stage possible? // The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2023. No. 2. Р. 19. DOI: 10.52180/2073-6487_2023_2_34_49. EDN: PYJTYM. (In Russ).
Buchwald E.M., Ryabova I.A. The state and local self-government: how to ensure a new level of interaction? // Regional economy. South of Russia. 2021. Vol. 9. No. 1. Рp. 4–15. DOI: org/10.15688/re.volsu.2021.1.1. EDN: TBIVGO. (In Russ).
Gainanov D.A., Gataullin R.F., Ataeva A.G. Methodological approach and tools for ensuring balanced spatial development of the region // Economic and social changes: facts, trends, forecast. 2021. Vol. 14. No. 2. Рp. 75–91. DOI: 10.15838/esc.2021.2.74.5. EDN: LHJIEU. (In Russ).
Glazunova I.V. The Delegation of powers between executive authorities and local selfgovernment bodies // Current issues of the modern economy. 2022. No. 12. Рp. 291–299. DOI: 10.34755/IROK.2022.36.24.020. (In Russ).
Domnina S.V., Podkopaev O.A. Components of the development of the Samara-Tolyatti agglomeration // Financial economics. 2020. No. 8. Рp. 47–52. DOI: 10.25997/FIE.2020.79.8.001. EDN: VGCAZL. (In Russ).
Doroshenko S.V., Tretyak A.N., Ilinbaeva E.A. The concept of the strategy of socioeconomic development of sub-regional education// Regional economics and Management: an electronic scientific journal. 2014. № 2 (38). Article number: 3807. (In Russ).
Ivanov O.B., Buchwald E.M. Sub-regional management and development of local selfgovernment in the regions of Russia // STAGE: economic theory, analysis, practice. 2018. No. 4. Рp. 7–31. DOI: 10.24411/2071-6435-2018-10034. (In Russ).
Ivanova M.A. Amendments of 2020 as a basis for strengthening the expansion of the state over local governments // Bulletin of the Russian Law Academy. 2021. No. 3. Рp. 20–25. DOI: org/10.33874/2072-9936-2021-0-3-20-25. (In Russ).
Konstantinovich D.A., Fedoseeva O.Yu. Urban agglomerations in Russia: problems and prospects (taking into account the experience of formation and development of the Samara-Tolyatti agglomeration) // Bulletin of the Volzhsky State University after V.N. Tatishchev. 2022. Vol. 2. No. 3 (50). Рp. 98–110. DOI: 10.51965/20767919_2022_2_3_98. (In Russ).
Larichev A.A., Markwart E. Local communities as a tool for the development of general municipal democracy: the German experience and lessons for Russia // Comparative Constitutional Review. 2020. No. 5 (138). Рp. 74–88. DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2020-5-74-88. EDN: XJYWPI. (In Russ).
Nekrasov S.I. Extraterritorial competence in the local organization of public authority // Lex Russica (Russian Law). 2017. No. 1 (122). Рp. 140–152. (In Russ).
Pavlov Yu.V. Identification and analysis of agglomeration effects in the economy of the region (on the example of the Samara region) // Economics, entrepreneurship and law. 2023. T. 13. No. 8. Рp. 2983–3004. DOI: 10.18334/epp.13.8.118827. (In Russ).
Tazhitdinov I.A. The subregion as a special link of the territorial-economic system: the essence, features of functioning and management // Bulletin of the Ufa State Technical University. university. Economics and management of the national economy. 2013. Vol. 17. No. 1 (54). Рp. 191–197. (In Russ).
Shamkhalov M.A., Elmurzaev A.M. Features of the general principles of the organization of local self-government in the Russian Federation // Law and law. 2019. No. 5. Рp. 45–47. DOI 10.24411/2073-3313-2019-10192. EDN: ZFAMVN. (In Russ).

Manuscript submission date: 03.10.2023

For citation:

Buchwald E.M., Bessonov I.S. Subregions in the spatial organization of the Russian Federation regions // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2024. № 1. Pp. 7-27. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_1_7_27 EDN: DZWBTK

Creative Commons 4.0