- Email: [email protected]
Analysis of Performance Indicators of Functioning of Territories with Special Economic Status in the Russian Federation
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
15th International scientific conference “Underground Urbanisation as a Prerequisite for Sustainable Development”
Analysis of performance indicators of functioning of territories with special economic status in the Russian Federation Sergei Beliakov a,*, Anna Kapustkina a a
Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, Yaroslavskoye sh. 26, Moscow, 129337, Russia
Abstract Socio-economic development of regions should be based on their production, investment, resource potentials and taking into account geographic, demographic and other features. Support and regulation of development processes is a key task of regional public policy, having at their disposal a fairly wide range of instruments. In order to ensure the accelerated development of some territories of the Russian Federation currently implemented national target programmes which provide the formation of the most favorable conditions for the inflow of investment into various fields of regional development. In the framework of this article discusses the interim results of functioning of special economic zones and territories of priority socio-economic development in Russia, carried out their comparison and analysis, and discusses the key aspects of control and monitoring indicators of their effectiveness. Performance management involves a set of measures aimed at timely identification of metrics and indicators that allow you to track turning points in the socio-economic development. According to the authors of the article, a key condition for formation of system of indicators of the functioning of territories is to ensure its universality and at the same time taking into account the specific features of each territory. There are many approaches to the classification of the indicators and indicators of socio-economic development. In the framework of the given classification it is advisable to use a number of criteria, characterizing the following key areas of socio-economic development of the territories concerned. In this context the analysis of the effectiveness of territorial development, it is advisable to use a set of indicators of economic safety of the territory. © Published by Elsevier Ltd. This 2016The TheAuthors. Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2016 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 15th International scientific conference “Underground Peer-review under scientific committee of the 15th International scientific conference “Underground Urbanisation as a Urbanisation as aresponsibility Prerequisiteof fortheSustainable Development. Prerequisite for Sustainable Development Keywords: performance indicators, performance management, development of territories, special economic zones, territories of priority socioeconomic development.
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]
1877-7058 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 15th International scientific conference “Underground Urbanisation as a Prerequisite for Sustainable Development
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.874
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
1425
1. Introduction A necessary condition for economic development and strengthen the sovereignty of the state is to provide comprehensive and equal development of its various territories. Socio-economic development of regions should be based on their production, investment, resource potentials and taking into account geographic, demographic and other features. [4] Support and regulation of development processes is a key task of regional public policy, having at their disposal a fairly wide range of instruments (Figure 1).
Regional policy
The regulation of the fiscal system
Planning and forecasting
Investment loans
Interest subsidy
Depreciation benefits
Regulation tools
Tax benefits
Subsidies for creating new jobs
Fig.. 1. The regulatory tools of the regional policy.
2. Experimental section In order to ensure the accelerated development of some territories of the Russian Federation currently implemented national target programmes which provide the formation of the most favorable conditions for the inflow of investment into various fields of regional development. [2] In the last 10 years, the most significant and large-scale development project in economically disadvantaged regions of Russia was the creation following the example of successful international projects (primarily sold in China and South Korea) zones with special conditions of doing business in a number of territories. These include special economic zones (SEZ) and territories of priority socio-economic development (TPSED). In the framework of this article discusses the interim results of functioning of SEZ and TPSED in Russia, carried out their comparison and analysis, and discusses the key aspects of control and monitoring indicators of their effectiveness. The SEZ is a restricted area with special legal status and economic conditions for national and foreign entrepreneurs. The main objective of the SEZ is the solution of strategic tasks of development, including foreign trade, economic, social, regional and scientific-technical problems. In Russia the implementation and operation of the SEZ began in 2005 with the adoption of the Federal Law "About special economic zones" 22.07.2005. As of January 1, 2016 in Russia were 33 special economic zones: 9 industrial production, 6 technical innovation, 3 port and 15 tourism and recreation. Table 1 presents the indicators that characterize the efficiency of functioning of some of the SEZ. The table presents the indicators for industrial production, technological innovation and port special economic zones.
1426
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
Table 1. Indicators of efficiency of functioning of the SEZ. Indicator
SEZ "Alabuga"
SEZ "Lipetsk"
SEZ "Dubna"
SEZ "Moglino"
SEZ "Zelenogra d"
SEZ in SaintPetersburg
SEZ in Ulianovsk
8 270
3 220
2 372.5
30
3 388
5 663.8
81
2 756
1 000
9 490
3 239
22 435
9 439.7
826.6
1/3
1/3
1/0.4
1/0.001
1/0.15
1/0.5
1/0.1
The number of jobs created by SEZ residents
4 620
2 600
1450
5
900
750
30
The number of residents on 02.09.2016
48
30
100
1
40
35
5
The implementation of the terms of construction of infrastructure
partially implemented
partially implemented
partially implemented
not implemented
not implemente d
not implemented
not implemented
The volume of investments made by SEZ residents, mln. RUB. The volume of public investment, mln. RUB. The actual ratio of public and private investment
Source: Data of the Ministry of economic development and other public sources.
TPSED - economic zone with tax incentives and simplified administrative regulations created in order to attract investment, boost the economy and improve the quality of life of the population. Today in Russia operates 12 TPSED. In the period from 2016 to 2020 their number will increase to 45. To ensure their effective functioning in Russia adopted the Federal Law of 29.12.2014 "About territories of advancing socioeconomic development in the Russian Federation". Consider the same indicators interim performance of private TPSED (Table 2). Table 2. Indicators of efficiency of functioning of TPSED. Indicator
The volume of investments made by TPSED residents, mln. RUB. The volume of public investment, mln. RUB. The actual
TPSED "Komsomolsk"
TPSED "Khabarovsk"
TPSED "Nadezhinskaya"
TPSED "Belogorsk"
TPSED "Priamurskaya"
1 269.4
2 514
4 300
821
2 700
1 015.5
1 231
2 500
20
0
TPSED "Mikhailovski y" 5 542
1 632.7
TPSED "Kamchatk a"
3 200
3 000
1427
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429 ratio of public and private investment
0.8/1
0.5/1
0.6/1
0.02/1
0/1
0.3/1
0.9/1
The number of residents on 02.09.2016
6
14
11
3
2
6
16
The implementati on of the terms of construction of infrastructure
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemente d
Source: Data from Corporation of development of the Far East and other open sources.
3. Results section According to the results of the interim analysis of the effectiveness of the SEZ in Russia, conducted at the Federal level in 2016, revealed a negative correlation: in 2006, 33 of the SEZ spent 186 billion rubles, of which 24 billion was never used, and tax and customs payments from the zones during this time amounted to 40 billion rubles. In the SEZ was created 18 thousand jobs instead of the planned 25 thousand. On January 1, 2016 according to the SEZ do not have time to learn for 84.4 thousand hectares of 214 thousand hectares of the allocated land. As one of the main causes of low efficiency of the SEZ, a dedicated low level of compliance by regional authorities of their obligations. Regions underfunded the SEZ in the amount of 45.7 billion. Given such poor performance, the decision was made to close 10 of SEZ and transfer the remaining into the competence of the regional authorities in order to enhance their sense of responsibility in ensuring the effectiveness of the SEZ. A comparative analysis of the presented indicators showed that in the current economic circumstances, the TPSED are more effective and, as a consequence, can be considered as the most promising tool of regional development. It should also be noted that the performance indicators TPSED have the potential of significant growth in the next 3-5 years. This is due to the incompleteness of currently reproductive cycles initiated at the time of the formation of an TPSED. 4. Discussion section Effective development of territories is impossible without competent management. We will examine key principles of performance management in relation to areas of advancing socio-economic development. Performance management involves a set of measures aimed at timely identification of metrics and indicators that allow you to track turning points in the socio-economic development. According to the authors of the article, a key condition for formation of system of indicators of the functioning of the TPSED is to ensure its universality and at the same time taking into account the specific features of a specific TPSED. There are many approaches to the classification of the indicators and indicators of socio-economic development. In general, indicators can be divided into 4 groups: x indicators of socio-economic development; x indicators of economic security; x forecast indicators of crisis situations; x indicators of the environment. Within this classification, it is advisable to use a number of criteria that characterize the following fields and directions of social-economic development of the territories [8]: x the social sphere;
1428
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
x monetary and financial sphere; x industry; x construction; x transport; x trade; x services; x investment; x the institutional characteristics of credit organizations; x operations with foreign currency; x raised funds; x allocated funds; x the standard of living of the population; x employment; x institutional change; x demographics. In this context the analysis of the effectiveness of TPSED, it is advisable to use a set of indicators of economic safety of the territory (Table 3). [11] Table 3. Indicators of economic safety of the territory. Indicator
Unit
Threshold value
The volume of GRP per capita (the percentage of reference values)
%
50
The share of investment in GRP
%
25
The share of food imports in domestic consumption
%
25
The degree of wear of fixed assets of industrial enterprises
%
60
The ratio of the rate of renewal and disposal of fixed assets
number of times
3
The ratio of savings and investment
number of times
1.0
The share of foreign investments in the total volume of investments in fixed capital
%
15-17
The ratio of research spending in the GRP
%
2.0
The ratio of internal current expenditures on basic research, applied research and development
number of times
1:3:9
The ratio of expenditure on technological innovation and spending on research and development
number of times
2.0
Share of regional credit institutions in the total number of credit institutions in the region
%
50
The proportion in the population of people with incomes below the subsistence minimum
%
7
Life expectancy
years
70
Income differentials
number of times
8
The crime rate
number per 100 thousand people
5000
The unemployment rate
%
7
Housing affordability
the ratio of market price to average annual household income
12
The employment-to-population
%
60
The ratio of social expenditures in the consolidated regional budget per capita with a living wage
%
50
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429 The growth rate of consumer spending
%
5-6
The rate of growth in real incomes
%
5-7
1429
5. Conclusion According to the results of the analysis the authors make the conclusion about necessity of development of approaches to monitoring the performance of territories with special economic status and, in particular, TPSED. Therefore it is proposed to improve the system of indicators of socio-economic development of regions. It is advisable to use as the main indicators of economic security of territories, most adequately reflecting the socioeconomic situation in the regions. References [1] S. Fortescue, Russia's economic prospects in the Asia Pacific Region, Journal of Eurasian Studies. 7/1 (2016) 49-59. [2] S.G. Sheina, A.A. Khamavova, Technique for the Russian Federation Regional Territories Assessment Used to Create Industrial Parks Network, Procedia Engineering. 150 (2016) 1960-1965. [3] V. Glinskiy, L. Serga, M. Khvan, Assessment of Environmental Parameters Impact on the Level of Sustainable Development of Territories, Procedia CIRP. 40 (2016) 625-630. [4] D. Medvedev, A new reality: Russia and global challenges, Russian Journal of Economics. 1/2 (2015) 109-129. [5] S. Garcia-Ayllon, J. L. Miralles, New Strategies to Improve Governance in Territorial Management: Evolving from “Smart Cities” to “Smart Territories”, Procedia Engineering. 118 (2015) 3-11. [6] J. A. Berdegué, F. Carriazo, B. Jara, F. Modrego, I. Soloaga, Cities, Territories, and Inclusive Growth: Unraveling Urban–Rural Linkages in Chile, Colombia, and Mexico, World Development. 73 (2015) 56-71. [7] S. Malle, Economic modernisation and diversification in Russia, Constraints and challenges, Journal of Eurasian Studies. 4/1 (2013) 78-99. [8] V.V. Smagina, O. Yu. Chernyshova, Basic components of advancing management model, Socio-economic phenomena and processes. 10(56) (2013) 106-110. [9] N.V. Lesyuta, Characteristics of development of urbanized territories in Siberia, Geography and Natural Resources. 31/1 (2010) 63-67. [10] L.A. Bezrukov, L.M. Korytny, Role of Siberia's territories in the economic development of Russia, Geography and Natural Resources. 30/ 3 (2009) 229-235. [11] I.V. Novikova, N.I. Krasnikov, Indicators of economic security of the region, Economics. 11 (2009) 132–138.
ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
15th International scientific conference “Underground Urbanisation as a Prerequisite for Sustainable Development”
Analysis of performance indicators of functioning of territories with special economic status in the Russian Federation Sergei Beliakov a,*, Anna Kapustkina a a
Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, Yaroslavskoye sh. 26, Moscow, 129337, Russia
Abstract Socio-economic development of regions should be based on their production, investment, resource potentials and taking into account geographic, demographic and other features. Support and regulation of development processes is a key task of regional public policy, having at their disposal a fairly wide range of instruments. In order to ensure the accelerated development of some territories of the Russian Federation currently implemented national target programmes which provide the formation of the most favorable conditions for the inflow of investment into various fields of regional development. In the framework of this article discusses the interim results of functioning of special economic zones and territories of priority socio-economic development in Russia, carried out their comparison and analysis, and discusses the key aspects of control and monitoring indicators of their effectiveness. Performance management involves a set of measures aimed at timely identification of metrics and indicators that allow you to track turning points in the socio-economic development. According to the authors of the article, a key condition for formation of system of indicators of the functioning of territories is to ensure its universality and at the same time taking into account the specific features of each territory. There are many approaches to the classification of the indicators and indicators of socio-economic development. In the framework of the given classification it is advisable to use a number of criteria, characterizing the following key areas of socio-economic development of the territories concerned. In this context the analysis of the effectiveness of territorial development, it is advisable to use a set of indicators of economic safety of the territory. © Published by Elsevier Ltd. This 2016The TheAuthors. Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2016 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 15th International scientific conference “Underground Peer-review under scientific committee of the 15th International scientific conference “Underground Urbanisation as a Urbanisation as aresponsibility Prerequisiteof fortheSustainable Development. Prerequisite for Sustainable Development Keywords: performance indicators, performance management, development of territories, special economic zones, territories of priority socioeconomic development.
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]
1877-7058 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 15th International scientific conference “Underground Urbanisation as a Prerequisite for Sustainable Development
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.874
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
1425
1. Introduction A necessary condition for economic development and strengthen the sovereignty of the state is to provide comprehensive and equal development of its various territories. Socio-economic development of regions should be based on their production, investment, resource potentials and taking into account geographic, demographic and other features. [4] Support and regulation of development processes is a key task of regional public policy, having at their disposal a fairly wide range of instruments (Figure 1).
Regional policy
The regulation of the fiscal system
Planning and forecasting
Investment loans
Interest subsidy
Depreciation benefits
Regulation tools
Tax benefits
Subsidies for creating new jobs
Fig.. 1. The regulatory tools of the regional policy.
2. Experimental section In order to ensure the accelerated development of some territories of the Russian Federation currently implemented national target programmes which provide the formation of the most favorable conditions for the inflow of investment into various fields of regional development. [2] In the last 10 years, the most significant and large-scale development project in economically disadvantaged regions of Russia was the creation following the example of successful international projects (primarily sold in China and South Korea) zones with special conditions of doing business in a number of territories. These include special economic zones (SEZ) and territories of priority socio-economic development (TPSED). In the framework of this article discusses the interim results of functioning of SEZ and TPSED in Russia, carried out their comparison and analysis, and discusses the key aspects of control and monitoring indicators of their effectiveness. The SEZ is a restricted area with special legal status and economic conditions for national and foreign entrepreneurs. The main objective of the SEZ is the solution of strategic tasks of development, including foreign trade, economic, social, regional and scientific-technical problems. In Russia the implementation and operation of the SEZ began in 2005 with the adoption of the Federal Law "About special economic zones" 22.07.2005. As of January 1, 2016 in Russia were 33 special economic zones: 9 industrial production, 6 technical innovation, 3 port and 15 tourism and recreation. Table 1 presents the indicators that characterize the efficiency of functioning of some of the SEZ. The table presents the indicators for industrial production, technological innovation and port special economic zones.
1426
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
Table 1. Indicators of efficiency of functioning of the SEZ. Indicator
SEZ "Alabuga"
SEZ "Lipetsk"
SEZ "Dubna"
SEZ "Moglino"
SEZ "Zelenogra d"
SEZ in SaintPetersburg
SEZ in Ulianovsk
8 270
3 220
2 372.5
30
3 388
5 663.8
81
2 756
1 000
9 490
3 239
22 435
9 439.7
826.6
1/3
1/3
1/0.4
1/0.001
1/0.15
1/0.5
1/0.1
The number of jobs created by SEZ residents
4 620
2 600
1450
5
900
750
30
The number of residents on 02.09.2016
48
30
100
1
40
35
5
The implementation of the terms of construction of infrastructure
partially implemented
partially implemented
partially implemented
not implemented
not implemente d
not implemented
not implemented
The volume of investments made by SEZ residents, mln. RUB. The volume of public investment, mln. RUB. The actual ratio of public and private investment
Source: Data of the Ministry of economic development and other public sources.
TPSED - economic zone with tax incentives and simplified administrative regulations created in order to attract investment, boost the economy and improve the quality of life of the population. Today in Russia operates 12 TPSED. In the period from 2016 to 2020 their number will increase to 45. To ensure their effective functioning in Russia adopted the Federal Law of 29.12.2014 "About territories of advancing socioeconomic development in the Russian Federation". Consider the same indicators interim performance of private TPSED (Table 2). Table 2. Indicators of efficiency of functioning of TPSED. Indicator
The volume of investments made by TPSED residents, mln. RUB. The volume of public investment, mln. RUB. The actual
TPSED "Komsomolsk"
TPSED "Khabarovsk"
TPSED "Nadezhinskaya"
TPSED "Belogorsk"
TPSED "Priamurskaya"
1 269.4
2 514
4 300
821
2 700
1 015.5
1 231
2 500
20
0
TPSED "Mikhailovski y" 5 542
1 632.7
TPSED "Kamchatk a"
3 200
3 000
1427
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429 ratio of public and private investment
0.8/1
0.5/1
0.6/1
0.02/1
0/1
0.3/1
0.9/1
The number of residents on 02.09.2016
6
14
11
3
2
6
16
The implementati on of the terms of construction of infrastructure
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemented
implemente d
Source: Data from Corporation of development of the Far East and other open sources.
3. Results section According to the results of the interim analysis of the effectiveness of the SEZ in Russia, conducted at the Federal level in 2016, revealed a negative correlation: in 2006, 33 of the SEZ spent 186 billion rubles, of which 24 billion was never used, and tax and customs payments from the zones during this time amounted to 40 billion rubles. In the SEZ was created 18 thousand jobs instead of the planned 25 thousand. On January 1, 2016 according to the SEZ do not have time to learn for 84.4 thousand hectares of 214 thousand hectares of the allocated land. As one of the main causes of low efficiency of the SEZ, a dedicated low level of compliance by regional authorities of their obligations. Regions underfunded the SEZ in the amount of 45.7 billion. Given such poor performance, the decision was made to close 10 of SEZ and transfer the remaining into the competence of the regional authorities in order to enhance their sense of responsibility in ensuring the effectiveness of the SEZ. A comparative analysis of the presented indicators showed that in the current economic circumstances, the TPSED are more effective and, as a consequence, can be considered as the most promising tool of regional development. It should also be noted that the performance indicators TPSED have the potential of significant growth in the next 3-5 years. This is due to the incompleteness of currently reproductive cycles initiated at the time of the formation of an TPSED. 4. Discussion section Effective development of territories is impossible without competent management. We will examine key principles of performance management in relation to areas of advancing socio-economic development. Performance management involves a set of measures aimed at timely identification of metrics and indicators that allow you to track turning points in the socio-economic development. According to the authors of the article, a key condition for formation of system of indicators of the functioning of the TPSED is to ensure its universality and at the same time taking into account the specific features of a specific TPSED. There are many approaches to the classification of the indicators and indicators of socio-economic development. In general, indicators can be divided into 4 groups: x indicators of socio-economic development; x indicators of economic security; x forecast indicators of crisis situations; x indicators of the environment. Within this classification, it is advisable to use a number of criteria that characterize the following fields and directions of social-economic development of the territories [8]: x the social sphere;
1428
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429
x monetary and financial sphere; x industry; x construction; x transport; x trade; x services; x investment; x the institutional characteristics of credit organizations; x operations with foreign currency; x raised funds; x allocated funds; x the standard of living of the population; x employment; x institutional change; x demographics. In this context the analysis of the effectiveness of TPSED, it is advisable to use a set of indicators of economic safety of the territory (Table 3). [11] Table 3. Indicators of economic safety of the territory. Indicator
Unit
Threshold value
The volume of GRP per capita (the percentage of reference values)
%
50
The share of investment in GRP
%
25
The share of food imports in domestic consumption
%
25
The degree of wear of fixed assets of industrial enterprises
%
60
The ratio of the rate of renewal and disposal of fixed assets
number of times
3
The ratio of savings and investment
number of times
1.0
The share of foreign investments in the total volume of investments in fixed capital
%
15-17
The ratio of research spending in the GRP
%
2.0
The ratio of internal current expenditures on basic research, applied research and development
number of times
1:3:9
The ratio of expenditure on technological innovation and spending on research and development
number of times
2.0
Share of regional credit institutions in the total number of credit institutions in the region
%
50
The proportion in the population of people with incomes below the subsistence minimum
%
7
Life expectancy
years
70
Income differentials
number of times
8
The crime rate
number per 100 thousand people
5000
The unemployment rate
%
7
Housing affordability
the ratio of market price to average annual household income
12
The employment-to-population
%
60
The ratio of social expenditures in the consolidated regional budget per capita with a living wage
%
50
Sergei Beliakov and Anna Kapustkina / Procedia Engineering 165 (2016) 1424 – 1429 The growth rate of consumer spending
%
5-6
The rate of growth in real incomes
%
5-7
1429
5. Conclusion According to the results of the analysis the authors make the conclusion about necessity of development of approaches to monitoring the performance of territories with special economic status and, in particular, TPSED. Therefore it is proposed to improve the system of indicators of socio-economic development of regions. It is advisable to use as the main indicators of economic security of territories, most adequately reflecting the socioeconomic situation in the regions. References [1] S. Fortescue, Russia's economic prospects in the Asia Pacific Region, Journal of Eurasian Studies. 7/1 (2016) 49-59. [2] S.G. Sheina, A.A. Khamavova, Technique for the Russian Federation Regional Territories Assessment Used to Create Industrial Parks Network, Procedia Engineering. 150 (2016) 1960-1965. [3] V. Glinskiy, L. Serga, M. Khvan, Assessment of Environmental Parameters Impact on the Level of Sustainable Development of Territories, Procedia CIRP. 40 (2016) 625-630. [4] D. Medvedev, A new reality: Russia and global challenges, Russian Journal of Economics. 1/2 (2015) 109-129. [5] S. Garcia-Ayllon, J. L. Miralles, New Strategies to Improve Governance in Territorial Management: Evolving from “Smart Cities” to “Smart Territories”, Procedia Engineering. 118 (2015) 3-11. [6] J. A. Berdegué, F. Carriazo, B. Jara, F. Modrego, I. Soloaga, Cities, Territories, and Inclusive Growth: Unraveling Urban–Rural Linkages in Chile, Colombia, and Mexico, World Development. 73 (2015) 56-71. [7] S. Malle, Economic modernisation and diversification in Russia, Constraints and challenges, Journal of Eurasian Studies. 4/1 (2013) 78-99. [8] V.V. Smagina, O. Yu. Chernyshova, Basic components of advancing management model, Socio-economic phenomena and processes. 10(56) (2013) 106-110. [9] N.V. Lesyuta, Characteristics of development of urbanized territories in Siberia, Geography and Natural Resources. 31/1 (2010) 63-67. [10] L.A. Bezrukov, L.M. Korytny, Role of Siberia's territories in the economic development of Russia, Geography and Natural Resources. 30/ 3 (2009) 229-235. [11] I.V. Novikova, N.I. Krasnikov, Indicators of economic security of the region, Economics. 11 (2009) 132–138.