Chapter 1. State industrial policy as an object of political analysis.

1.1. Concept, essential features and basic models of state industrial policy.

1.2. Features of the formation and implementation of state industrial policy in modern conditions.

1.3. Regional aspect of state industrial policy: analysis of foreign experience.

Chapter 2. All-Russian and regional dimensions of industrial policy.

2.1. Specificity of the industrial policy of the Russian Federation.

2.2. Features of the regional industrial policy of Russia at the present stage.

2.3. The main directions of industrial policy of the subjects of the Central Federal District (on the example of Bryansk,

Vladimirskaya, Ivanovskaya, Kurskaya and Tula regions).

Recommended list of dissertations

• Development of transport communications in the system of directions of state regional policy in modern conditions: the example of railway transport in the Republic of Dagestan 2011, candidate of political sciences Ibragimov, Marat Abdulmukminovich

• Regional policy of Russia in the context of reforming federal relations 2002, Candidate of Political Science Medvedev, Valentina Kuzminichna

• State regulation of regional development: the spatial structure of power and regional economic policy 2006, Doctor of Economics Larina, Nadezhda Ivanovna

• 2009, candidate of political sciences Evstegneeva, Olga Vyacheslavovna

• Improving the regional policy of border regions of the Russian Federation as a joint task of authorities at all levels: Case study of the Chita region 2005, candidate of political sciences Burnashova, Yulia Gennadievna

Dissertation introduction (part of the abstract) on the topic "State industrial policy of modern Russia: national and regional aspects"

Relevance of the research topic. In the context of the ongoing global financial and economic crisis, the negative consequences of which could not but affect Russia, it becomes especially urgent to study the problem of developing an effective industrial policy that meets modern realities and challenges of our state. It is an active industrial policy aimed at modernizing the national economy and the transition to innovative forms of management that is an obligatory and decisive prerequisite not only for overcoming the consequences of the current economic crisis, but also for Russia to reach qualitatively new levels of development of the main spheres of public life in the 21st century. Only in this case, Russia will be able not only to maintain its position as an important political and economic entity in the international arena, but also to take a more worthy place in the system of the world division of labor, to strengthen its position in the conditions of constantly toughening global competition, to fully obtain the advantages of the new technological order.

As you know, the mechanism for the implementation of industrial policy, based on the system of directive management of the economy, cannot effectively fulfill its role in the new socio-political conditions. In the Soviet period, industrial policy in its national and regional dimensions was aimed at the development and development of certain territories, the placement of productive forces, fixed assets, etc. on them. Being strictly centralized, measures of regional industrial development - direct budgetary injections, the establishment of special conditions for the supply of enterprises in individual regions, construction projects and projects of an all-Union scale (like the development of virgin lands, the turning of northern rivers, the construction of the BAM, etc.), other redistributive moments - were so or otherwise they are oriented towards the rise of the national outskirts, sometimes to the detriment of the development of the central part of the country. The industrial policy implemented by such administrative-command methods, in fact, contributed to the strengthening of regional imbalances and social differentiation: the national republics, often having a weak production structure, nevertheless, were leaders in the provision of the population with consumer goods and household services.

However, attempts to change the state of affairs in the sphere of industrial development of regions, undertaken in the 1990s by abandoning administrative-command mechanisms and transferring models of simplified monetarism to Russian soil, failed, as evidenced by the distortions in the credit and financial sphere, and the protracted investment the crisis, as well as the most acute consequence of such a policy - the default in August 1998.

The current economic conditions, determined, among other things, by the consequences of the global financial and economic crisis that have not yet been fully overcome, objectively require the state to provide new content and mechanisms for the implementation of state industrial policy, focus on economic growth in both the public and private sectors. ; both at the macro and micro levels of the economy; both throughout the country and within individual regions. At the same time, in the latter aspect, the main directions and mechanisms for the formation of an active industrial policy stimulating economic growth have not yet been sufficiently developed. At the same time, in the context of a significant redistribution of powers between the federal center and the regions, a serious transformation of interbudgetary relations, the analysis of the regional aspect of the state industrial policy is of particular importance.

Despite the fact that various aspects of the problem of the formation and implementation of industrial policy at different levels have been developed by many modern specialists, an integral theoretical understanding has not yet been developed. According to many, both scholars and researchers, and those involved in the field of practical political and economic activity, it is hardly possible to speak of a more or less clear understanding of what is meant by state industrial policy in general and regional industrial policy in particular, what are its content, main directions, etc. And although today at the federal level the process of formulating and formalizing the main directions of the state industrial policy is quite active1, nevertheless, effective methods of implementing such a policy on the ground have not yet been developed. The discussions that have been going on for several years about industrial policy carried out by the authorities at various levels are still characterized by an extraordinary range of opinions, an unprecedented variety of ideological approaches and value orientations.

This problem is especially relevant for the subjects of the Central Federal District - one of the most industrially developed regions of the Russian Federation2. central Russia

1 In particular, the Strategy for the Development of the Light Industry of Russia for the Period up to 2020, the Strategy for the Development of the Chemical and Petrochemical Industry of Russia for the Period up to 2015, the Strategy for the Development of the Shipbuilding Industry for the Period until 2020 and industry of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2015, the Strategy for the development of the metallurgical industry of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2015, as well as some other documents of this kind. See: the site of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http://www.minpromtorg.gov.ru.

Often the regions of Central Russia are called old industrial or regions of old development (see, for example: Vavilova E.V. Economic geography and regional studies. M., 2004. S. 118). the cultural-historical and socio-political basis of the Russian statehood, the basic center of resettlement of the state-forming Russian people, electorally the most significant part of the country's territory. Here, earlier than in other regions of Russia, ferrous metallurgy, metalworking, salt production, woodworking, as well as textile, glass, ceramic and some other industries were born and began to develop dynamically. Taking into account the increasing influence that the subjects of the Central Federal District have on the socio-political life of the whole country every year, the appeal to the formation and implementation of industrial policy in them seems to be very timely, and not only in a specific regional context, but also in the all-Russian context.

The degree of scientific elaboration of the problem. Scientific understanding of the phenomenon of industry, the essential characteristics of political and economic processes taking place in society, mechanisms for regulating economic flows and control over economic space, the state and prospects of relations between the state and business - these and many other issues are increasingly becoming the object of close attention from various groups of authors. The most important impetus to large-scale scientific developments of the problems under consideration was the appearance of works by such foreign researchers as K. Marx, A. Smith, F. Engels, and in a later era - S. Bru, J. Keynes, A. Lesch, K. McConnell, A. Marshall, D. North, W. Oiken, M. Porter, W. Rostow, P. Samuelson, J. Stiglitz, D. Hyman, et al. 4

3 Marx K., Engels F. Works. Ed. 2nd. T. 1-50. M., 1954-1974; Smith A. Research on the nature and causes of the wealth of the people. Petrozavodsk, 1993; and etc.

4 Keynes J.M. General theory of employment, interest and money / per. from English M., 1978; Lesh A. spatial organization of the economy / Per. with him. M., 2007; McConnell C.R., Bruce S.L. Economics: Principles, Problems and Policy. In 2 volumes / Per. from English M., 1992; Marshall A. Principles

In domestic science, the foundations of the analysis of the problems of the economic development of the state, including industrial development in its regional refraction, were somehow laid down in the works of I.M. Goldstein, S.E. Desnitsky, S.O. Zagorsky, L.B. Kafenhaus, V.I. Lenin, I.T. Pososhkova, F.S. Saltykov, V.N. Tatishcheva, M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky and a number of other representatives of Russian socio-philosophical, political economic and socio-political thought5.

Nowadays, we can talk about the emergence of a corresponding direction in Russian political economy, represented by the works of A.G. Aganbegyan, M.K. Bandman, P.I. Burak, V.V. Vorobieva, G.B. Kleiner, N.S. Kosova, V.V. Kuleshova, V.N. Leksin, G.Kh. Popova, A.I. Sitnikova, R.I. Shniper et al. 6 economic science: In 3 volumes / Per. from English M., 1993; North D. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. M., 1997; Oyken V. Basic principles of economic policy. M., 1995; Porter M. International Competition: Competitive Advantages of Countries. M., 1993; Samuelson P. Economics. M., 1992; J. Stiglitz. The Roaring Nineties. Disintegration seeds / Per. from English M., 2005; Hayman D. Modern microeconomics: analysis and application. M., 1992; Rostow W. The stages of economic growth. Cambridge, 1960; and etc.

5 Goldstein I.M. Is the Russian reality favorable for the formation of syndicates and trusts? M., 1913; Desnschkiy S.E. A word about the direct and closest way to teaching jurisprudence // Selected works of Russian thinkers of the second half of the 18th century. In 2 t. T. 1. M., 1952; Zagorskiy S.O. Syndicates and Trusts. SPb., 1914; Kafengauz L.B. Syndicates in the Russian railway industry. M., 1910; Lenin V.I. Full composition of writings. In 55 t. M., 1967-1970; Pososhkov I.T. "The Book of Poverty and Wealth" and other works. M., 1951; Propositions of Fyodor Saltykov: Manuscript from the collection of P.N. Tikhanova // Monuments of ancient writing. Volume LXXXIII (83). Adj. 5.SPb., 1891; Tatishchev V.N. Proposal for the multiplication of factories // Historical archive. M., 1951. T. VII; Tugan-Baranovsky M.I. Foundations of Political Economy. 1st ed. SPb., 1909; etc.

6 See, for example: A.G. Aganbegyan. Socio-economic development of Russia. M., 2005; Bandman M.K. Some aspects of forecasting the formation of labor resources and the necessary living conditions for the population of territorial industrial complexes. Novosibirsk, 1987; Bandman M.K. Forecasting the formation of industrial centers in the new developing regions of the USSR. Novosibirsk, 1988; Bandman M.K., Vorobieva V.V., Esikova T.N. Yenisei - Northern Sea Route: cargo-generating potential of the Angara-Yenisei region. Novosibirsk, 1999; Burak P.I. Industrial zones of large cities of Russia: mechanisms of development regulation. M., 2003; Klesher G.B. Decision Making Mechanisms in Industrial Enterprises: Results of Empirical Analysis. M., 1998; Kosoe N.S. State regulation of the investment process in the context of the transition of the economy to the market. M., 2000; Popov G.Kh. Comprehensive rationalization of production management. M., 1987; Problems of the theory and practice of reforming the regional economy: Sat. scientific. tr. ed. P.I. Burak. M., 2000; Systemic regulation of territorial development: economic and legal aspect / B.H. Leksin, A.I. Sitnikov, O. N. Yunin. M., 1990; Territorial industrial complexes / Otv. ed. V.V. Kuleshov. Novosibirsk, 1987; Shniper R.I. Interaction of participants in the regional reproduction process in a regulated market economy. Novosibirsk, 1990; and etc.

At the same time, the degree of development of topics directly related to regional industrial policy is still extremely low, primarily due to the fact that the aspects related to it themselves have arisen relatively recently and have become the subject of research only in recent years. In this regard, an important role in this study is played by conceptual provisions, generalizations and conclusions formulated by domestic authors - representatives of various branches of political science and related sciences. The works of A.B. Vasilenko, JI.E. Ilyicheva, A.M. Kovalev, B.C. Komarovsky, V.A. Lepekhina, S.P. Peregudova, JI.B. Smorgunova, A.I. Soloviev et al.7 Special attention in the development of the issues stated in this study is given to the works of such scientists as R.G. Abdulatipov, A.N. Arinin, I.M. Busygin, S.D. Valentey, V. Ya. Gelman, G.V. Kamenskaya, N.P. Medvedev, JI.B. Smirnyagin, R.F. Turovsky, I.A. Umnova, V.E. Chirkin8 and others, devoted to the problems of federalism and regional politics, as well as their evolution in modern Russia. Their study allows a deeper understanding of the specifics of the organization of the Russian political, economic and sociocultural space, dwell in more detail on identifying the place and role in it of various socio-political institutions, channels and the nature of their interactions.

7 See: A.B. Vasilenko. Russian oil companies in political transition processes. M., 1997; State policy and management: In 2 hours / Ed. L.V. Smorgunova. M., 2006; Ilyicheva JI.E. Lobbying and business interests. M., 2000; Kovalev A.M. Industrial civilization and the fate of Russia. M., 2003; Lepekhin V.A. Lobbying. M., 1995 .; Peregudov S.P. A large Russian corporation as a socio-political institution. M., 2000; Soloviev A.I. Political Science: Political Theory, Political Technology. M., 2001; Technology in Politics and Political Governance / Ed. ed. B.C. Komarovsky et al. M., 2000; and etc.

8 See: R.G. Abdulatipov. Federallogy. SPb., 2004; Arinin A.N. Towards a new development strategy for Russia: federalism and civil society. M., 2000; Busygina I.M. Political regionalism. M., 2006; G.V. Kamenskaya Federalism: Mythology and Political Practice. M., 1998; N.P. Medvedev Political regionalism. M., 2005; Russian federalism. Economic and legal problems / otv. ed. S. D. Valentey. SPb., 2008; Smirnyagin JI.B. Russian federalism: paradoxes, contradictions, prejudices. M., 1998; Turovsky R.F. Political regionalism. M., 2006; Umnova I.A. Constitutional foundations of modern Russian federalism. M., 1998; Chirkin V.E. Modern Federalism: A Comparative Analysis. M., 1995; and others with a friend, including in the implementation of their specific interests in the political sphere.

Also in this context, it is worth turning to the problems of state regulation of economic development, the regional aspects of which were developed by both domestic and foreign researchers9. They posed and studied a number of important problems: the history of the formation of industrial policy as an economic, political and social phenomenon; evolution of the main models of industrial policy; analysis of various approaches to the essential characteristics of industrial policy; principles, conditions, factors of formation of industrial policy; assessment of problems, difficulties, prospects for the development of industrial policy in Russia, etc. It should be emphasized that modern Russian scientists, along with questions of a theoretical and methodological nature, primarily seek to find out how industrial policy will be implemented in our country, what will become domestic economy, etc.

It should be noted that the issues of the formation of industrial policy, its nature and the peculiarities of functioning in modern society (including Russian) were touched upon to one degree or another in a number of dissertations, among which studies in the economic sciences prevail10. As for dissertations

9 See: Anthology of world political thought. In 5 volumes. M., 1997; Borisov E.F. Basics of economic theory. M., 1996; Galperin V.M., Ignatiev S.M. Microeconomics. SPb., 1996; History of the World Economy. Economic reforms 1920-1990 / Ed. A.I. Markova. M., 1995; History of Economic Thought. 2 hours M., 1989-1994; Kokorev V.E. The economy as it is. Essays on "pure" theory and applied research. M., 1998; The course of the economy in transition / Ed. acad. L.A. Abalkin. M., 1997; Kholopov A.B. History of Economic Thought. M., 2008; Economics / Ed. A.I. Arkhipova, A.N. Nesterenko, A.K. Bolshakov. M., 1998; and etc.

10 See, for example: Alakhtaeva N.M. Strategic planning as a mechanism for ensuring the industrial policy of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation: on the example of the Republic of Khakassia. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. M., 2007; Aliev B.Kh. Formation and implementation of industrial policy in a depressed region. Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. Makhachkala, 2001; Buk C.B. Industrial policy as a factor in ensuring the economic security of the region (for example, in political sciences, the problems of state industrial policy in general and its regional dimension in particular have so far rarely come to the attention of their authors11.

As you can see, despite the certain attention of scientists to these topics and some success in studying the content and implementation of industrial policy in modern conditions, there are still a number of important issues that require further research. This circumstance, as well as the obvious insufficiency of considering the problems of developing both conceptual and applied principles for the formation and implementation of industrial policy, its place in the system of state policy in general and in the conditions of modern Russia in particular, from the political point of view, determine the object and subject of this dissertation research.

The object of the dissertation research is the state industrial policy, the subject is the main factors, priorities, principles, mechanisms, tendencies of its

Kemerovo region). Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Kemerovo, 2004; Evseenko S.B. Organizational and economic mechanisms for the formation of industrial policy (on the example of the machine-building complex of the Omsk region). Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Omsk, 2004; Moiseeva O.G. Modern industrial policy in the region: economic aspects, problems, prospects for implementation. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Rostov-on-Don, 2001; Ovodkova T.A. The role of industrial policy in the development of the modern Russian economy. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Tambov, 2006; Romanova A.A. Formation and mechanism for the implementation of state industrial policy at the regional level. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Eagle, 1999; Shafikova JI.P. Formation of industrial policy of territorial-production complexes (on the example of the Astrakhan region). Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Astrakhan, 2004; and etc.

11 Lipatov V.A. The mechanism for coordinating the interests of the state and entrepreneurs in the development and implementation of industrial policy (for example, railway engineering). Dissertation for the degree of candidate of political sciences. M., 2006; Pirogov A.B. Interaction between government and business in the implementation of financial and industrial policy: regional projection. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of political sciences. Armavir, 2008; Remizov D.K. State leadership in the formation and implementation of industrial policy in the field of innovation in modern Russia: a political science analysis. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of political sciences. Rostov-on-Don, 2008. formation and implementation at the all-Russian and regional levels.

The study is supposed to achieve a twofold goal: firstly, to identify the specifics of state industrial policy as an object of political science analysis and, secondly, to determine the main priorities and principles for the formation of regional industrial policy in modern Russia. At the same time, taking into account the practical needs and experience of the author of the thesis, it seems appropriate to focus on the industrial policy of some regions of the Central Federal District.

To implement the research goal, it seems necessary to consistently solve a set of the following tasks:

Analyze the main approaches to the definition of the concept of "state industrial policy", give its author's interpretation, as well as reveal the essential features of state industrial policy as a socio-political phenomenon;

Consider the features of the formation and implementation of state industrial policy in the current stage of socio-political development in the leading countries of the world, highlight the general and specific in various models of state industrial policy;

Explore the regional aspect of state industrial policy, its conceptual foundations, as well as basic models and features of their use in various countries, including in relation to their old industrial regions;

Study the main factors and conditions that determine the specifics of the state industrial policy of modern Russia, reveal the leading trends and assess them from the point of view of possible political prospects;

To reveal the specific features of the regional industrial policy of Russia at the present stage, the main mechanisms and forms of its implementation, as well as to develop a normative system of its priorities and principles; on the basis of an analysis of the features of the current industrial policy of the Bryansk, Vladimir, Ivanovo, Kursk and Tula regions, identify the main priorities and principles of the formation of the concept of industrial policy of these constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

The theoretical and methodological foundations of the study include systemic, comparative, problematic and other general scientific approaches, as well as a wide range of methods of modern political science and a number of other related sciences. Taking into account the initially complex, dynamic status of the material under study, the methodological foundation of the study was formed by the principles of the unity of the historical and the logical, the ascent from the abstract to the concrete, comprehensiveness, realism, objectivity of consideration, and integrity.

The achievements of modern political regionalism are of great theoretical and methodological significance for the dissertation. The use of the methodology of regional political research has shown high efficiency in analyzing the degree of influence of various structures of the regional level on the implementation of state industrial policy in modern Russia.

Although the work is not in the nature of economic research, its implementation on the basis of approaches applied in economic science is essential. Possessing significant heuristic value, these approaches contribute to understanding the nature of such a complex and multifaceted phenomenon as industrial policy.

The use of the institutional approach allows you to focus on informal institutions that are involved in one way or another in the relationship between economic (for example, financial-industrial groups, transnational corporations, etc.) and power structures in national and regional political processes.

An important component of the theoretical and methodological base of the dissertation research has become new scientific paradigms for the analysis of industrial and post-industrial society, as well as approaches to the study of the specifics of the participation of the state and non-state institutions and structures in political processes at various levels, such as the concept of political networks, the pluralistic concept of mediation, neo-corporatism, etc. Along with this, a special place in the work is occupied by the provisions of the concepts of modern civil society, political participation, multi-party system, etc.

When identifying the main mechanisms and forms of implementation of state industrial policy, the author relied on the results of research by the largest representatives of political science, economic, legal and sociological thought, used the works of Russian and foreign scientists.

The main provisions for the defense:

1. State industrial policy is a set of targeted measures of a regulatory and administrative nature designed to ensure the development of all or individual industries in a particular country in accordance with the spatial, temporal and quantitative and qualitative priorities of such development set by civil society and the state. State industrial policy should be systemic in nature, carried out within the framework of a specific strategy and management tactics, through optimal methods and effective methods that take into account national imperatives and regional specifics, adequate to the development of the situation in the country and developed on the basis of certain values ​​and ideals that reflect internal and foreign policy interests of society and the state.

2. The most significant bases for the typologization of industrial policy models are the ultimate goals, focus, and civilizational specifics. Depending on the final goals, “hard” and “soft” industrial policies are distinguished (the first aims to create and develop sectors of the economy identified as priority ones, while the second is focused on promoting the growth of competitiveness of all national producers). Depending on the direction, a system-wide and selective industrial policy is distinguished (the first is aimed at creating general conditions favorable to the development of the real sector of the economy, while the second is a targeted influence on enterprises, certain types of production or activities). Depending on the specifics of civilization, Western European, North American and Asian types of industrial policy are distinguished.

3. The outlines of the normative model of the state industrial policy include such main directions as: creation of effective ways of forming and implementing industrial policy; development of state and market mechanisms for providing production with the necessary resources (primarily financial and personnel); introduction of advanced technologies, exploration of mineral deposits, etc .; creation of tools for intersectoral, intersectoral and interregional capital outflow; measures to attract investment and stimulate innovation. At the same time, in modern conditions, the formation and implementation of state industrial policy presupposes, along with relying on global trends and patterns, taking into account the specifics of a particular national community, first of all, the features of its territorial structure and quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the development of its regions.

4. Regional industrial policy, including in relation to old industrial areas, can be implemented directly or indirectly through restrictive and incentive measures. Restrictive measures include administrative measures (limiting capital construction, areas of allocated land plots) and financial (increasing taxes, subsidizing the departure of the population), aimed primarily at curbing the growth of urban agglomerations and reducing the concentration of industrial production in them. Incentive measures include measures: firstly, at the regional level, aimed at stimulating the development of problem regions (improving the properties of the territory by placing state enterprises and institutions on it, introducing preferential regimes, creating appropriate infrastructure, etc.), and secondly, address level, aimed at providing assistance to individual industries and enterprises in the region (investment programs, inclusion in government orders, the provision of various benefits, etc.).

5. The priorities of the state industrial policy of modern Russia, which has taken a course towards building a strong national economy as the main condition for its political and socio-economic movement forward and maintaining the status of a world power, are: openness of industrial policy; equality of subjects of industrial policy; support of industrial policy measures by the state. The main instruments of regional industrial policy of federal and regional authorities in modern Russia are a set of direct and indirect measures of an administrative and managerial nature. Direct measures include the adoption of federal and regional legislation in the field of regulation of state property, management of public sector enterprises, the establishment of subsidies, transfers, etc. Indirect measures are, firstly, financial and economic (fiscal policy, investment policy, income regulation policy, foreign economic policy), and secondly, socio-economic (social development programs, ensuring effective employment, social protection of the population, policy in the field education, health care, culture, etc.).

6. Currently, one of the trends in the field of industrial policy is the creation of state corporations on the basis of a number of structural subdivisions of federal executive bodies (primarily federal agencies) and federal state unitary and state-owned enterprises. State corporations created in strategic sectors of the Russian economy are one of the forms of implementing an effective state industrial policy that can give the development of the domestic national economic complex qualitatively new impulses and largely neutralize the threats and challenges of the modern period, the costs of the processes of internationalization of the economic and globalization of political spheres. All other things being equal, state corporations are capable of becoming the engines of growth of the national economy, and with the sectoral and regional projection of their organizational structures, functions and areas of activity - "poles of growth" in the respective industries and regions.

7. The most important instrument of regional industrial policy in modern Russia can be the creation of regional corporations - both in the system of state corporations and along with them. Similarly to state ones, regional corporations can become an organizational and legal form of concentration of resources of both the federal center and the authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, and representatives of the regional business community, and specific economic entities represented by their leadership and labor collectives, the concentration of these resources within the framework of the functioning of a separate enterprise or a network of enterprises (branches of the regional economy) with innovative potential for the economy of both the region and the country. The jurisdiction of regional corporations could include tasks not only related to purely production processes, but also directly related to the development of regional infrastructure - economic (related and service industries, suppliers of raw materials, energy capacity), communication (transport and communications), social (housing and communal services, a network of educational, medical and cultural institutions, etc.). Also, these corporations could become a platform for direct communication between the business community and the federal and regional authorities, for reconciling sometimes very different interests and linking them with the strategic priorities of the development of the country and individual regions.

8. Solving problems within the framework of priority national projects, as well as those set by the country's leadership in recent years, one way or another, will require a transition from a policy of leveling the socio-economic development of territories to a policy of polarized development, to the identification and support of regions - "locomotives of growth." Based on this, the main priority of the concept of industrial policy in the Bryansk, Vladimir, Ivanovo, Kursk and Tula regions should be the priority development of high-tech and science-intensive industries, a significant increase in the share of innovative products in the total industrial production of the region. Thus, in the formation and implementation of the industrial policy of the regions under consideration, it is necessary to focus on such a system of priorities as: an open discussion of the main directions of industrial policy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation; taking into account the legitimate interests of all participants in industrial activity in these areas; implementation of a full-fledged administrative, legal, organizational, logistical, etc. support by the administrations of these regions of events in the industrial sphere.

The scientific novelty of the dissertation is determined by a number of features that have not been found in existing studies on similar topics. They are as follows:

Based on the analysis of the main approaches to the definition of the concept of "state industrial policy", its author's definition was developed, taking into account the specifics of state industrial policy as a socio-political phenomenon and revealing the essential features;

The features of the formation and implementation of state industrial policy in the current stage of socio-political development in different countries of the world are considered, general and special features in the main civilizational models of state industrial policy are highlighted;

The conceptual foundations and practical experience of the implementation of regional industrial policy, including in relation to the old industrial regions, within the framework of the main civilizational models of state industrial policy;

Based on the study of the main factors and conditions that determine the specifics of the state industrial policy of modern Russia, an assessment is made of the basic trends in this area from the point of view of possible political prospects;

The specific features of the regional industrial policy of Russia at the present stage, the main mechanisms and forms of its implementation are revealed, and a normative system of its priorities and principles is proposed;

Based on the analysis of the features of the current industrial policy of the Bryansk, Vladimir, Ivanovo, Kursk and Tula regions, the main priorities and principles of the formation of the concept of industrial policy of these constituent entities of the Russian Federation are outlined.

The practical significance of the work, which has a methodological orientation, lies in the fact that, firstly, it can contribute to the formation of the concept of industrial policy in individual regions of Russia, and secondly, it can draw the attention of scientists and practitioners even more to one of the most pressing and complex problems, which is the problem of the formation and implementation of state industrial policy, to serve as a new impetus for its versatile and comprehensive research.

In addition, the main conclusions and provisions substantiated in the dissertation can be used in the development of official documents by state bodies, political parties and public organizations, in specific political science studies, as well as in the preparation of educational and teaching aids, lectures and seminars on history and theory of politics, comparative political science, contemporary world and Russian politics, political regionalism, economic policy, etc.

Approbation of dissertation research. The thesis was discussed at a meeting of the Department of Political Science, History and Social Technologies of the Moscow State University of Railways and recommended for defense.

The results of the dissertation research have found application in the practical work of the author, first as a senior researcher at the Institute for Intercivilizational Research, and now as a researcher at the Scientific and Expert Council of the All-Russian Union of Public Associations "Russian Nation".

The main provisions and conclusions of the dissertation are reflected in the publications of the author.

Similar dissertations majoring in Political Institutions, Ethnopolitical Conflictology, National and Political Processes and Technologies, 23.00.02 code VAK

• Regulation of the economic development of an industrially developed constituent entity of the Federation 2001, Doctor of Economics Rossel, Eduard Ergartovich

• Financial and industrial groups as a subject of regional political processes in modern Russia 2005, candidate of political sciences Maslova, Ekaterina Nikolaevna

• 2012, Doctor of Political Sciences Bekbosynov, Mels Borombaevich

• Features of managing the socio-economic development of a subsidized region 2008, Doctor of Economics Mukin, Sergey Viktorovich

• Fiscal federalism as an institutional factor in the socio-political development of Russian regions: the example of the Republic of Buryatia 2009, candidate of political sciences Strekalovskaya, Yulia Aleksandrovna

Conclusion of the thesis on the topic "Political institutions, ethnopolitical conflictology, national and political processes and technologies", Krekotnev, Sergey Nikolaevich

Conclusion

The formation of an effective state and regional industrial policy adequate to external and internal realities in our country turned out to be one of the most difficult tasks of the reform measures that began in the 1990s and, in fact, continue to this day. This process has stood in the way for a long time, and in a number of Russian regions there is still a whole range of economic (protracted process of transition to market relations), financial (limited income base and imbalance of local budgets), social (disintegration of the existing social infrastructure, decline in living standards, etc.) etc.), political (falling public confidence in the institutions of power), socio-cultural (lack of stable traditions of entrepreneurship, low level of owner's culture, etc.) obstacles.

It is obvious that the process of forming and implementing a new industrial policy in its national and regional dimensions in such a huge, multi-confessional, asymmetrically developed country like Russia cannot be simple, smooth and conflict-free. In a historically tight time frame, some Russian regions were able to do what developed democracies have been building for centuries. The new industrial policy grew out of the resource heritage and began to correspond to the historical and economic traditions of Russian society. Therefore, already now, many regions of Russia, all other things being equal, can successfully solve the tasks they face, implement the political and economic course in the most important spheres of life of the local community, one of which is the industrial sphere.

However, if a lot of research has been devoted to the formation and implementation of the industrial policy of the Russian Federation, then in the study of the regional aspect of industrial policy, its place in the system of state industrial policy of modern Russia, there are still certain gaps, and the study was intended to fill a number of which.

As its results show, a new impulse in the development of industrial policy at the national and regional levels has arisen recently in connection with the awareness of the need to increase industrial production in Russia as one of the main conditions for its progressive socio-economic development, not subject to all kinds of challenges and crisis phenomena. global origin. Within the framework of the industrial policy of the regions of Russia, the foundations should be laid for solving such strategically important tasks as strengthening the unity of the economic space, ensuring the economic security of the state, expanding the legal field for regulating public relations, including those related to the use of industrial resources.

At the same time, it is important to emphasize that in modern conditions, the industrial policy of federal and regional structures, in order to be fully and effectively implemented, requires wide publicity and support from various segments of the public.

In general, with all the strengths and weaknesses of the industrial policy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, with all the positive and negative trends that the new industrial policy may carry, it is the regional and federal authorities, as well as business structures, that remain a unique institution that has a real impact on the entire industrial sector of the region. ...

Today's priorities for the development of the regional industrial sphere in a number of positions are determined locally. With the support of the federal government aimed at overcoming the negative consequences of the financial and economic crisis as soon as possible, ensuring uniform living standards, identical starting conditions, local authorities, using a wide range of tools, are able to independently create the prerequisites for industrial growth in a particular region. However, despite the seemingly common goal of creating competitive production and conditions for sustainable development of territories and the country as a whole, the mechanism and tools for implementing industrial policy may vary in individual territorial-production complexes depending on the level of regional economic development and social status. ...

Currently, many industrially developed constituent entities of the Russian Federation are forming their own independent industrial policy. In a number of regions of the Russian Federation, concepts of industrial policy have been developed, laws on industrial policy have been adopted. The main directions of these laws at the long-term stage of development of the industrial sector of the economy are the creation of a competitive industrial complex in the region, which will enhance the contribution of industry to solving the socio-economic problems of the territory.

At the same time, the full-scale and comprehensive implementation of these areas at the present time in the overwhelming majority of constituent entities of the Russian Federation (and the old industrial regions of Central Russia are no exception here) is not possible without appropriate federal target programs, the development of budgetary federalism, an effective national investment policy, the use of mechanisms direct support of problem regions from the federal center. Thus, it is necessary to deepen the research, fill the theoretical and methodological foundations and practical provisions of the industrial policy of the regions of the Russian Federation with new content.

List of dissertation research literature candidate of political sciences Krekotnev, Sergey Nikolaevich, 2011

1. Normative legal acts, official sources and documents

2. The Constitution of the Russian Federation. M .: Legal Literature, 2009.

3. Annual Address of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. M., 2000. (See also the subsequent annual Messages of the President of the Russian Federation.)

4. State strategy of economic security of the Russian Federation (Basic provisions). Approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of April 29, 1996 No. 608 // Site of the Security Council of the Russian Federation (http://www.scrf.gov.ru).

5. National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation until 2020. Approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of May 12, 2009 No. 537 // Site of the Security Council of the Russian Federation (http://www.scrf.gov.ru).

6. The main provisions of regional policy in the Russian Federation. Approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 3, 1996 No. 803 // Site of the Security Council of the Russian Federation (http://www.scrf.gov.ru).

7. The concept of long-term socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2020. Approved by the Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 17, 2008 No. 1662-r // Internet portal of the Government of the Russian Federation (http://www.government.ru).

8. Strategy for the development of light industry in Russia for the period up to 2020. Approved by Order of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Russia dated September 24, 2009 No. 853 // Website of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation (http://www.minprom.gov.ru).

9. Strategy for the development of the metallurgical industry of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2015 Approved by order of the Ministry of Industry and Energy of Russia dated July 4, 2007 // Website of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation (http://www.minprom.gov.ru).

10. Anisimov V.F. Sub-federal level of industrial policy: experience, problems, ways, improvement. M., 2005.

11. Babkin KA Reasonable industrial policy, or How can we get out of the crisis. M., 2009.

12. Bashirov Kh.G. Sustainable development of the region's industry: models and mechanisms. Rostov-on-Don, 2007.

13. Brykin A.B., Shumaev V.A. Formation of industrial policy based on logistics. M., 2007.

14. Butukhanov A.B., Popov D-A., Renzin O.M. Institutional aspects of industrial policy in Japan. Khabarovsk, 2006.

15. Vakarev A.A., Grishin I.A., Ushamirsky A.E. Industrial policy in the projection of sustainable development of cities and regions of Russia. Volgograd, 2005.

16. Velikhov E.P., Betelin V.B., Kushnirenko A.G. Industrial policy, innovations, mass information technologies, domestic backbone companies. M., 2007.

17. Vlaskin G.A., Lenchuk E.B. Industrial policy in the context of the transition to an innovative economy: the experience of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS. M., 2006.

18. Voskerichyan R.O. Instruments of industrial policy in Russia in the context of globalization. M., 2005.

19. Gokhberg M.Ya. Federal districts of the Russian Federation: analysis and prospects for economic development. M., 2002.

20. Grinin L. Production forces and the historical process. M., 2000.

21. Gritsay O., Ioffe G., Treivish A. Center and periphery in regional development. M., 1991.

22. Grishin H.A. Regional industrial policy for the development of small enterprises. Volgograd, 2008.

23. Gruzinov V., Gribov V. Economy of the enterprise. M., 1996.

24. Gutman G.V. Regional Economy Management. Moscow: Finance and Statistics, 2002.

25. Dementyev V.E. "Catching up post-industrialization" and industrial policy. M., 2006.

26. Other I.K. Interaction of various levels of economic management in the implementation of the industrial policy of the Russian Federation. SPb., 2006.

27. Evdokimova E.H., Polyakov S.G., Soldak Yu.M., Stepnov I.M. Small innovative entrepreneurship and industrial policy of single-industry and small towns. M., 2003.

28. Ermakov V. Ways of further development of the mechanism of territorial management. M., 1990.

29. Zhdanov V.P. Investment and industrial policy in the region. Kaliningrad, 2005.

30. Zubarev N.M. Methodology for the formation of the industrial policy of the regions in the context of integration transformations. SPb., 2006.

31. Zubarevich N.V. Social Development of Russian Regions: Problems and Trends in the Transition Period. M., 2007.

32. Kleiner G.B. Transitional mesoeconomics: Markets, industries, enterprises. M., 2001.

33. Cleland D., King W. Strategic planning and economic policy. M., 1982.

34. V. V. Klimanov. Regional systems and regional development in Russia. M., 2004.

35. Kovalev A.M. Industrial civilization and the fate of Russia: Ideas, reflections, hypotheses. M., 2003.

36. Kodin M.I. Russian political process: socio-philosophical aspects. M., 2008.

37. Komarov M.P. Infrastructure of the regions of the world. M., 2000.

38. Kondratyev N.D. Great business cycles and the theory of foresight. Selected Works. M., 2002.

39. Krylov E.I. Analysis of the efficiency of investment and innovation activities of the enterprise. M., 2002.

40. O. V. Kuznetsova. Economic development of regions: theoretical and practical aspects of state regulation. M., 2007.

41. Kruglikova T.V. Industrial policy of France in the second half of the XX century. M., 2008.

42. Leksin V.N., Shevtsov A.N. State and Regions: Theory and Practice of State Regulation of Territorial Development. M., 2007.

43. Lesh A. Spatial organization of the economy / Per. with him. M., 2007.

44. Lisin B.C. Institutional aspects of economic reforms in Russia. M., 2000.

45. Lisovskiy S.M. Contemporary regional industrial policy. Formation problems and implementation mechanism. Saratov, 2004.

46. ​​Lugacheva LEE. Sectoral aspects of regional industrial policy (on the example of mechanical engineering). Novosibirsk, 2007.

47. Lygina N.I. Harmonization of industrial and trade policies. SPb., 2008.

48. May B.A. Economy and Power (Political History of Economic Reform in Russia 1985-1994). M., 1995.

49. Moskvina OS Industrial policy the core of economic modernization. Vologda, 2003.

50. Nurgisaev S.U. Industrial policy in ensuring the economic security of depressed regions. SPb., 2003.

51. Okimoto D.I. Japanese experience of government intervention in the functioning of the market / Per. with jap. M., 1991.

52. Oorzhak VO Formation and implementation of the strategy of industrial development of the region. M., 2002.

53. Pantsh V.I. Cycles and waves of modernization as a phenomenon of social development. M., 1997.

54. Patrushev D.N. Formation of mechanisms of industrial policy in the branches of natural monopolies. SPb., 2007.

55. Petrov G.A. The territorial aspect of assessing the location and development of productive forces. M., 1997.

56. Petrosyants V.Z. Economic policy of a depressed region: problems of formation and implementation. M., 2005.

57. Popovich A.M. Formation and implementation of a strategy for the development of industry in the region: theory, methodology, practice. M., 2006.

58. Potapova E.N., Tolkachev S.A. Industrial policy and state regulation of the economy (modern aspects of Russian practice). M., 2006.

59. V. I. Putylin. Industrial policy of the enterprise: factors and principles of formation. Armavir, 2007.

60. Pchelintsev O.S. Regional economy in the system of sustainable development. M., 2004.

61. Raizberg BA Program-target planning and management. M., 2002.

62. Rassoshnykh A.S., Kobelev V.N. Organizational and economic aspects of the implementation of regional industrial policy. Yekaterinburg, 2004.

63. Roaring LD Production capacity, productivity and economic activity of the enterprise: Assessment, management accounting and control. M., 2002.

64. Rodionova H.A. Industry of the World: Territorial Shifts in the Second Half of the 20th Century. M., 2002.

65. Rubinstein E.I. Foundations of Industrial Policy. Surgut, 2000.

66. Sanzhina O.P., Badaraeva R.V. Formation of investment policy in the field of industrial development of the region. Ulan-Ude, 2006.

67. Sergeenkov V. Regional investment policy. M., 2000.

68. S.A. Smirnova Germany: a new stage of industrial development. M., 1990.

69. Strategies for Russian macroregions: methodological approaches, priorities and ways of implementation / Ed. Academician A.G. Granberg. M., 2004.

70. Sulakshin S.S. State policy of industrial development in Russia: from problems to actions. M., 2004.

71. Titarenko M.L. The strategy of turning China into a super-industrial state (1998-2050). M., 2002.

72. Turgel I. D. State industrial policy in conditions of economic growth: theory, methodology and implementation experience. Yekaterinburg, 2008.

73. Ulyukaev A.B. Waiting for the Crisis: The Course and Contradictions of Economic Reforms in Russia. M., 1999.

74. Federalism: theory, institutions, relations: Comparative legal research / Ed. Topornina B.N., M., 2001.

75. Tsogoev I.Kh. Organizational and economic aspects of the implementation of regional industrial policy. Vladikavkaz, 2004.

76. Shvartsman N.I. The political mechanism for the formation and coordination of state and municipal economic policy in modern Russia. Rostov-on-Don, 2004.

77. Shutyuk S.V., Afanasyeva H.A. Analysis of the relationship of large corporations with the regions. Yekaterinburg, 2005.

78. Economic subjects of post-Soviet Russia (institutional analysis) / Ed. P.M. Nureyev. M., 2001.

79. Fare R., Grosskopf S., Yaisawarng S. Intertemporal budgeting and efficiency. N.Y., 1995.

80. Mclean M, Voytek K. Understanding your economy: Using analysis to guide local Strategic planning. N.Y., 1992.

81. Yeager L. Monetary policy and economic performance. Wash., 1972.

82. I. Articles, speeches, conference proceedings

83. American industry in the 80s: problems of structural adjustment / Ed. T. Kondratyeva. M., 1987.

84. Amosov A.I. On the formation of the theory of evolutionary economics // Evolutionary economics and "mainstream". M., 2000.

85. Andreev A. et al. The concept of industrial development in the Perm region for the period 1999-2003. Landmarks of the future // Series "Industry of the Kama region in the XXI century", vol. 2. Perm, 1999.

86. Batnikov S., Petrov Yu. Industrial policy in the reform choice of Russia // Russian economic journal. 1997. No. 10.

87. Blyakhman L., Krotov M. The globalization dimension of the reform and the objectives of industrial policy // Russian Economic Journal. 2001. No. 4.

88. Vinslav Yu. Approving the scientific principles of management of integrated corporations // Russian economic journal. 2001. No. 10.

89. Dudkin V., Petrov Yu. Indicative planning - the mechanism of coordination of state and non-state subjects of economic management // Russian economic journal. 1998. No. 6-8.

90. Investment climate and legal system // Problems of management theory and practice. 2000. No. 3.

91. Kirichenko V. Reformation process and the formation of state industrial policy in Russia // Russian economic journal. 1999. No. 8. S. 3-21.

92. Klotsvog F.N. et al. Prospects for the economic development of Russian regions // Forecasting Issues. 1997. No. 4. S. 98-110.

93. The concept of the formation and implementation of modern industrial policy. M., 2002.

94. Small innovative entrepreneurship and industrial policy of single-industry and small towns. M., 2003.

95. Minakir P. Transformation of regional economic policy // Problems of theory and practice of management. 2001. No. 2. S. 8792.

96. Modeling the socio-ecological-economic system of the region / Ed. IN AND. Gurman, E.V. Ryumina. M., 2001.

97. Modernization: foreign experience and Russia. M., 1994.

98. Economic Modernization: Global Trends, Basic Constraints and Strategy Options. M., 2000.

99. National industrial policy of competitiveness (Experience of the West in the interests of Russia). M., 2002.

100. Neshchadin A. On the restructuring of the Russian industry // Problems of theory and practice of management. 2000. No. 4. S. 16-21.

101. New industrial wave in the West. Anthology / Ed. V.M. Inozemtseva. M., 1999.

102. Does Russia need industrial policy: materials of the round table meeting, June 26, 2007 M., 2007.

103. On the urgency of the transition to an active state industrial policy / Research Center of the Institute of National Economic Forecasting. M., 2002.

104. Experience in the formation and implementation of modern industrial policy in the development of the country. M., 2002.

105. Transitions and Disasters: The Experience of Socio-Economic Development. M., 1994.

106. Entrepreneurial Climate of Russian Regions: Geography of Russia for Investors and Entrepreneurs. M., 1997.

107. Forecasting the socio-economic development of the region: theory and methodology. Moscow: Nauka, 1981.

108. Industrial policy in Russia: to be or not to be ?: The fourth meeting of the seminar "Development strategy", 17 December. 2001 / Institute for Comprehensive Strategic Studies. M., 2002.

109. Enterprise development in the context of regional industrial policy. Materials of the scientific-practical seminar, Tver, November 14, 2006 Tver, 2007.

110. Regional strategy for economic growth 2015 / Ed. ed. V.A. Ilyin. M., 2007.

111. Regional development: the experience of Russia and the European Union / otv. ed. A.G. Granberg. M., 2000.

112. Regional problems of the economy in transition: theory and practice / Ed. prof. V.G. Aliyev. M., 2002.

113. Reforming enterprises: concept, model, program / Otv. ed. V. Golikov. M., 1998.

114. Russian industrial policy and the problems of industrialism. M., 1994.

115. Svinarenko A. Directions and features of industrial policy in the near future // Industry of Russia. 2000. No. 9.

116. Yu. Simachee, A. Sokolov, M. Gorst Have Federal Target Programs Become an Instrument of State Industrial Policy? // Russian economic journal. 2002. No. 8.

117. Improving the management of corporate entities and regional industrial policy: problems and innovations. Materials of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference (Perm, Perm University, December 14, 2007). Perm, 2007.

118. Socio-economic potential of the region: problems of assessment, use and management / Ed. Corresponding Member RAS A. Tatarkin. Yekaterinburg, 1997.

119. Management of the development of the region and the city: materials of the interregional scientific-practical conference, October 1999 / RAGS under the President of the Russian Federation. Under total. ed. Pankrukhina A.P. M., 2000.

120. Federal center and regions in the process of modernization: the experience of Germany and Russia: Materials of the Russian-German seminar, May 22, 2003, Volgograd. Editorial board: G.A. Vasiliev (editor-in-chief) et al. Volgograd, 2003.

121. Converging by diverging // The Economist. 2001. October, 2.1 .. Textbooks, study guides, reference books

122. Agarkov A.P. Problems of Russian industrial policy and the service sector. M., 2005.

123. Andreev A.B. Fundamentals of Regional Economics: Textbook. M., 2007.

124. Anthology of world political thought. In 5 volumes, M., 1997.

125. Arkhangelsky V.I. Factorial Forecasting of the Development of an Industrial Region and Industrial Policy: Textbook. M., 2002.

126. Atkinson E.B., Stiglitz J.E. Lectures on the economic theory of the public sector / Per. from English M., 1995.

127. Baranov A.B., Vartumyan A.A. Political regionalism: A course of lectures. Issue 1-5. M., 2003-2005.

128. Granberg A. Fundamentals of regional economics: Textbook for universities. M., 2000.

129. Isaev B.A., Baranov H.A. Political relations and the political process in modern Russia: Textbook. SPb., 2008.

130. V. V. Kistanov, N. V. Kopylov. Regional economy of Russia: Textbook. M., 2009.

131. Mikheeva H.H. Regional economics and management. Textbook for universities. Khabarovsk, 2000.

132. Regional Economics: Basic Course: Textbook / Ed. IN AND. Vidyapina, M.V. Stepanov. M., 2008.

133. Regional economy and management: Textbook / Kovalenko E., Zinchuk G., Kochetkova S., Maslova S. et al. SPb., 2008.

134. Placement of productive forces: Textbook for universities. M., 1994.

135. Revinsky I.A. Modern Economics Course: Textbook. Novosibirsk, 1999.

136. Smolin O.N. Political process in modern Russia: textbook. M., 2004.

137. The modern political process in Russia: study guide. At 3 o'clock M., 1995-2002.

138. Rubinstein E.I. Foundations of Industrial Policy: Textbook. Surgut, 2000.

139. Turned T.N. Foundations and modern forms of regional industrial policy: textbook. Volgograd, 2005.

140. Ushanov Yu.A. National Security and Industrial Policy: Lecture Notes. M., 2005.

141. V.A. Tsukerman Industrial, investment and innovation policy: an encyclopedic dictionary. Apatity, 2009.

143. Alakhtaeva N.M. Strategic planning as a mechanism for ensuring the industrial policy of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation: on the example of the Republic of Khakassia. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. M., 2007.

144. Aliev A.I. Investment policy directions in the industrial complex of the Republic of Dagestan. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Makhachkala, 2006.

145. Aliev B.Kh. Formation and implementation of industrial policy in a depressed region. Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. Makhachkala, 2001.

146. Anisgshov V.F. Sub-federal level of industrial policy: conceptual and organizational-economic support. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. M., 2006.

147. R.V. Badaraeva. Formation of regional industrial policy based on the assessment of the competitiveness of enterprises. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Ulan-Ude, 2005.

148. Bondar V.M. Formation of regional investment and industrial policy. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. SPb., 2003.

149. Vic C.B. Industrial policy as a factor in ensuring the economic security of the region: the case of the Kemerovo region. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Kemerovo, 2004.

150. Gazimagomedov R.K. Contemporary regional industrial policy: a cluster approach. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. M., 2005.

151. Galiullina G.F. Improvement of the industrial policy of the territory with a large machine-building complex. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Naberezhnye Chelny, 2008.

152. Gil R.V. Priority directions and forms of implementation of state industrial policy in Russia. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Rostov-on-Don, 2006.

153. Gusev S.N. Structural dynamics and substantiation of industrial growth policy: on the example of the Republic of Tatarstan. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Kazan, 2002.

154. Dzaparov M.E. Development of program-targeted methods for the implementation of regional industrial policy: on the example of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. M., 2008.

155. Evseenko S.B. Organizational and economic mechanisms for the formation of industrial policy: on the example of the machine-building complex of the Omsk region. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Omsk, 2004.

156. Zaitseva E.I. Economic instruments of industrial policy of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation: on the example of the industrial complex of the Murmansk region. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Murmansk, 2006.

157. Zaitseva M.N. Formation of the industrial policy of the municipality. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. M., 2008.

158. Zubarev N.M. Methodology for the formation of the industrial policy of the region in the context of integration transformations. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. Ulan-Ude, 2007.

159. Kostin KB. Formation of industrial policy in the region. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. M., 2007.

160. Kudryashova M.G. Improvement of the regional industrial development management system based on credit instruments: the example of the Kamchatka region. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Vladivostok, 2006.

161. Melnikova O.A. Institutional transformation of regional industrial policy in Russia. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Volgograd, 2005.

162. Moiseeva O. G. Modern industrial policy in the region: economic aspects, problems, prospects for implementation. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Rostov-on-Don, 2001.

163. Nurgisaev S.U. Industrial policy in ensuring the economic security of depressed regions. Abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. SPb., 2003.

164. N. V. Ogorelkova. Management of investment and industrial policy: on the example of the industrial complex of the Omsk region.

165. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Omsk, 2005.

166. Oshchepkova M.D. Territorial marketing and industrial policy of the region. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Izhevsk, 2008.

167. Panichkin A.B. The state and main directions of the investment policy of the industrial complex of the Republic of Dagestan. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Astrakhan, 2006.

168. Pirogov A.B. Interaction between government and business in the implementation of financial and industrial policy: regional projection. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of political sciences. Armavir, 2008.

169. Romanova A.A. Formation and mechanism for the implementation of state industrial policy at the regional level. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Eagle, 1999.

170. Rykova I.A. Structural policy for the development of industry in the regions and the economic mechanism for its implementation. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Eagle, 1999.

171. Tayurskaya E.A. Formation of state industrial policy based on an educational approach.

172. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Krasnoyarsk, 2005.

173. Titov K. A. Formation and implementation of regional industrial policy. Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. SPb., 2003.

174. Ferov KS. Industrial clusters and their role in the formation of regional industrial policy. Dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Economics. Krasnoyarsk, 2005.

175. Khabrov S.A. Industrial policy and restructuring of industrial production: the example of the St. Petersburg region. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. SPb., 1997.

176. Tskayev A.Z. The state and main directions of improving the investment policy in the industrial complex: on the example of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Vladikavkaz, 2004.

177. Chekashkin D.M. Regional instruments for the formation of industrial policy. Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Krasnoyarsk, 2008.

178. Chub A.A. Improving the management of the development of the social infrastructure of the industrial complex of the region. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Vladimir, 2002.

179. OI Shalabanova Regional economic policy: specifics of implementation in the field of industrial production (on the example of the Kemerovo region). Abstract of dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Kemerovo, 2007.

180. Shafikova L.R. Formation of industrial policy of territorial-production complexes: on the example of the Astrakhan region. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Astrakhan, 2004.

181. A.G. Shepshelev Industrial policy as a tool for managing the development of the economic complex of the region. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. Barnaul, 2006.

182. Shcherbakov V.Yu. Organizational and economic mechanisms of interaction between authorities at various levels in the process of forming the industrial policy of the Russian Federation. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of economic sciences. M., 2007.

Please note that the above scientific texts are posted for information and obtained by means of recognition of the original texts of dissertations (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors associated with the imperfection of recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.

MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY OF WAYS OF COMMUNICATION

Volga Branch

Faculty: Informatization, Economics and Management

Department: "Economic Theory"

COURSE WORK

By discipline

"State regulation of the economy"

"The concept of modern industrial policy of the Russian Federation"

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Fiscal Policy

1.2 Tax policy

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

INTRODUCTION

Since the late 80s - early 90s, our country, once again steeply turning 180 degrees in the history of its development, took a course towards market reforms, proclaiming the main priority to build a “civilized” market. Applying the experience of developed capitalist countries, the government adopted a liberal market model, betting on the efficiency and self-regulation of market mechanisms.

In the hope that the “invisible hand of the market” is quite capable of carrying out structural transformations and bringing the Russian economy to a new, higher-quality stage of development, the state took measures to create the institution of private property as a fundamental component of the market and reduce the influence of the state itself on the relationship of subjects within the framework of market economy.

However, the liberalization of the pricing process fully revealed all the structural imbalances of the Soviet economy, resulting in high inflation, budget deficits, impoverishment of the population and stagnation of production. In these conditions, the government took a course towards financial stabilization. But the subsequent well-known events of August 1998. the “achievements” of financial stabilization were safely buried and all eyes were directed to the real sector for its all-round support. One of the main conditions for overcoming the protracted economic crisis, stabilization and industrial growth was recognized as "the revival of the real sector of the economy and, first of all, its most important link - industry."

Meanwhile, the situation in Russia is such that the existence of some very important industries may cease in the near future, since at the moment they are outside the opportunistic interests of financial capital and are not supplied with much-needed investments, and by the time these industries become in demand, they are simply will no longer be. And this is not acceptable for the economic and social development of our country within the framework of the world economy. Therefore, it is in this situation that a well-thought-out and effective state regulation of the production structure in the long term is necessary.

Thus, the state needs to take under its tutelage not only rule-making, but also the definition, forecasting and implementation of mechanisms for the development and improvement of the structure of social production, to develop a set of long-term measures aimed at strategic regulation of economic processes for the development of priority sectors. It is precisely at the solution of these problems that such an instrument of state influence on the economy as industrial policy is aimed.

The relevance of the topic of this course work is due to the fact that at present the problem of developing a meaningful industrial policy in the Russian Federation is very important, since the further development of the country will depend on it. This is confirmed by the discussion in which the industrial, scientific, political community, federal industrial ministries participate. Such attention to this issue is due to the fact that during the ten-year period of economic reforms in the country, practically the only task of financial stabilization was posed, as a condition for a massive inflow of foreign and private capital into the Russian economy. The tasks of economic growth and active industrial policy were not set as such. At least they weren't even secondary. To a large extent, the listed problems have been resolved to one degree or another over the past time. However, neither the President of the country in his official speeches, nor business, nor the population can be satisfied with the rates and prospects of economic growth.

Limiting the subject of analysis and subsequent proposals to industry, industrial development, industrial policy, it must be borne in mind that we are talking about the sphere of national production of material goods, a material product. This limitation does not contradict the problem of the historical stage of the post-industrial modernization of the country, since the informatization of industry, the increase in the share of an intellectually intensive product (intellectual property) in the structure of production, and the modernization of industry are included in the system of goals and values ​​in the proposed approaches. There is no contradiction with the mission of public administration, since in the inseparable context of the proposed consideration are issues of social and humanitarian responsibility of the state, issues of national security, the logic of the country's political choice of the last decade - a market economy, the country's entry into the world economy.

The development of market relations in Russia and its regions has actualized the problem of developing and implementing a well-grounded and well-thought-out industrial policy. In modern conditions, regional industrial policy requires a two-level structuring. On the one hand, this should be the policy of regional authorities, the core of which is activities aimed at reproduction by ensuring the optimal interaction of factors - resources in the field of industry on the territory of each specific region and the institutional provision of its advantages for the development of priority industries. The effective organization of such activities is able to relatively quickly stabilize the situation in industry in the country as a whole.

On the other hand, this should be the policy of the federal center. Its role is to create an all-Russian macroeconomic institutional environment that would facilitate the development of a regional initiative to build industrial capacity. Another task of the federal center in this regard is to stimulate the development of the industries most significant for the country's economy.

The aim of this work is to study the essence of industrial policy, its role in the development of Russia today.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks:

1. To study the essence of industrial policy and its tools.

2. Consider the concept of industrial policy, the stages of its development.

3. To study the main directions of the implementation of industrial policy in Russia.

The subject of research in this course work was the development and implementation of industrial policy in Russia. The object of the research is the industrial policy of the Russian Federation.

The course work consists of an introduction, three theoretical chapters, a conclusion and a bibliography. The first chapter provides a general description of industrial policy, examines its instruments: budgetary, tax, monetary, institutional, foreign economic, investment and innovation policies. The second chapter examines the stages of development of industrial policy, prospects for the development of technological specialization of industry, regional industrial policy. The third chapter analyzes the role of the state in the formation of the economic and industrial policy of Russia, the principles of the formation of industrial policy: domestic and world practice.

To write this term paper, scientific and practical works of modern domestic and foreign economists were used: Artemov A., Brykin A., Shumaev V., Begar V.V., Bose E., Vasiliev V.P., Vinslav Yu., Tsvetkov V . other.

CHAPTER 1. ESSENCE OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY, ITS INSTRUMENTS

According to the Concept of Industrial Policy developed by the Ministry of Economy of the Russian Federation, industrial policy is a set of measures implemented by the state in order to increase the efficiency and competitiveness of domestic industry and to form its modern structure, contributing to the achievement of these goals. Industrial policy is carried out in the general mainstream of the state economic policy aimed at structural transformations and the growth of social production.

The goals and priorities of industrial policy are developed on the basis of strategic guidelines set for the production and commercial activities of economic entities of the market, as well as for the social activities of the state.

There are several instruments of industrial policy, among which the most interesting for study are: budgetary, tax, monetary, institutional, foreign economic and investment policy. These tools will be discussed in detail below.

1.1 Fiscal Policy

Fiscal policy is one of the main instruments of both industrial policy and the economic policy of the state as a whole. The effectiveness of budgetary policy is assessed by the effectiveness of the activities of the executive authorities in relation to the main directions of budgetary policy: collection of budgetary revenues and tax revenues in particular; fulfillment of budgetary obligations; managing budget deficits and public debt.

It is clear that the state of public finances has a decisive impact on the real economy both in terms of fulfilling budgetary obligations and as a stimulus for increasing investment activity and reorienting financial flows from speculative financial markets to the sphere of material production.

Fiscal policy determines and regulates the revenue and expenditure side of the state federal budget. The income part is compiled on the basis of such items as tax revenues, non-tax revenues (revenues from privatization, from state property management, from foreign economic activity), revenues from targeted budget funds.

The instruments of budgetary policy in terms of budget expenditures are as follows: financing of the sphere of material production, science, social and cultural sphere, financing of foreign economic activity of the state (state loans, payment of% and servicing external debt, provision of gratuitous assistance to participants in foreign economic activity, foreign trade of state-owned enterprises), centralized financing of public needs (defense, public administration, maintenance of law enforcement agencies), the creation of federal reserve funds, servicing the state internal debt, investing in the development of the production base, grants, subsidies, financing of priority production and socio-economic activities.

1.2 Tax policy

Taxes are the main source of budget revenues. However, their function is not limited only to the fiscal nature. For the effective implementation of industrial policy, it is also necessary to take into account the incentive and distributive functions of taxes. Since collecting taxes only for the purpose of increasing budget revenues is not economically correct, it is necessary, when setting different tax rates, the procedure for collecting them and benefits for them, to take into account their impact on the development of priority industries, support for non-competitive, but socially significant industries.

Taxes have a strong impact on the structure and value of the costs of enterprises, as well as on the amount of net profit remaining for enterprises and, ultimately, on the amount of investments going to the development, re-equipment and maintenance of the competitiveness of the goods produced by these enterprises, and therefore on the competitiveness of industries and the country. in general, both in the domestic and foreign markets. Therefore, one should not abuse the fiscal part of taxes, but it is necessary to use more extensively the stimulating and distributive functions.

Also, within the framework of tax policy, the main subjects of taxation in the production chain of creating and promoting goods are determined and, by transferring the main tax burden to one or another of its links, the state has the ability to stimulate or limit them in accordance with the selected priorities of industrial policy. The toolkit of tax policy includes: setting by the state the amount (rate) of taxes and taxation procedure, determination of the tax base and its subjects, tax benefits, accelerated depreciation procedure, tax rebates and tax exemptions.

1.3 Monetary and financial policy

An important direction in the implementation of industrial policy is the regulation by the state of the sphere of monetary circulation. The form of organization of monetary circulation in the country is called the monetary system, which includes the national currency, the scale of prices, the system of credit and paper money, and the institutions of the monetary system.

Since not only money is widely used in modern economies, but also their derivatives (including cashless payments and borrowing), the monetary system in its pure form does not exist and it is customary to talk about the monetary system. From here comes the monetary policy - an instrument of the general economic policy of the state, aimed at the operational impact of the latter on the monetary system.

The profit remaining at the disposal of enterprises is used not only to encourage personnel, investments, but also to accumulate. And since these savings are made with an eye to the long term, they are temporarily unoccupied in the production process. Considering that not all companies currently have sufficient cash coverage for their production, there is a demand for free cash on their part. Thus, the presence, on the one hand, of temporarily free funds and the demand for them, on the other, generates their redistribution, i.e. financial market (financial relations).

And since, as is well known, additional monetary resources are needed not only by individual enterprises, but also by the state, there is a need for a financial policy - a set of state measures aimed at mobilizing financial resources, their distribution and use. The main state bodies for implementing these policies are the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (monetary policy) and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation (financial policy).

Monetary policy instruments are: operations on the open market (stock, foreign exchange), regulation of the discount rate (in Russia, this is the refinancing rate), the establishment of the required reserves of commercial banks, control and restrictions on certain types of loans (secured loans, mortgage loans , consumer credit, etc.). Financial policy instruments - issuance of government securities to secure and service government debt, issuance of loans for the development of production, regulation and control of financial markets and financial circulation, operational management of public funds.

1.4 Institutional policy

Institutional and legislative transformations aimed at improving property relations, stimulating the transition of enterprises to modern forms of business organization, developing competition between market participants, etc., are of great importance for the implementation of a targeted industrial policy by the state. Institutional policy implies the formation of a legal and organizational environment corresponding to market principles and objectives of industrial policy, the approval of a general order for all business entities, and rules of behavior.

Institutional policy includes the reform of enterprises in accordance with the modern structure of the economy, the development and comprehensive support of small businesses, the formation of large competitive corporate and holding entities (in particular financial and industrial groups), the implementation of measures for the transfer of state property to private ownership (privatization) or vice versa. (nationalization), legislative formation and support of new market institutions. The arsenal of institutional policy consists of such instruments as: various licenses, regulations, rule-making, the formation of effective organizational and economic structures, the transformation of property relations, the provision of market processes with an appropriate legal framework, the development of legal frameworks for the creation, functioning and liquidation of enterprises, including through the procedure bankruptcy.

1.5 Foreign economic policy

Since Russia is in direct contact with other states that have their own national interests, in this regard, the world market is similar to the national one, only in addition to the already well-known entities - households and firms - countries with their economic and political needs appear here. In order not to get lost in other people's interests and needs and to defend their own, the state pursues, within the framework of the general industrial policy, foreign economic policy, which is aimed at regulating economic relations with other countries participating in the world market.

The goal of foreign economic policy is to improve the country's position in the world economy, participate in the international division of labor, support domestic producers in the world markets and markets of other countries and protect them in the domestic market. The main strategic task of foreign economic policy is to create favorable foreign economic conditions for expanded reproduction within the country.

State regulation of foreign economic activity covers the sphere of foreign economic cooperation, the sphere of foreign trade, the foreign exchange policy of the state. There is an extensive set of foreign economic policy instruments - these are measures to stimulate exporters (export crediting, incentives, customs and tax exemptions for exports, subsidies, government guarantees for export deliveries), import or export restrictions (customs tariffs, quotas, anti-dumping investigations, the establishment of technological and environmental standards and standards), measures to attract or restrict access to foreign investment in the country's economy, change trade duties, membership in international economic organizations, the creation of special customs regimes and preferences, customs unions.

1.6 Investment and innovation policy

Investments - long-term capital investments with the aim of making a profit - are a necessary component of the effective development of any enterprise and are a prerequisite for the economic growth of the country's economy as a whole. For private companies, the source of investment is their own (profit, depreciation), borrowed (credits, loans) and attracted (company shares) funds. State investments are financed from tax revenues to the budget and budgetary funds, profits of state organizations, issuance of internal and external loans.

Investment is a highly volatile substance. The amount of investment is constantly fluctuating. Therefore, the investment policy pursued by the state should be aimed at ensuring guarantees of stability of investment in the national economy. The main objectives of the investment policy are to build up the scientific and production potential of the domestic industry, solve social problems of society, ensure the even development of the national economy, and regulate capital accumulation in various sectors of the economy.

Innovation policy is a kind of investment policy. It is aimed at ensuring state regulation of the processes of creation, commissioning, operation and subsequent disposal of innovations in the national economy, i.e. regulates the flow of investment resources aimed at the development and creation of technological innovations, to maintain a progressive technological base of the domestic industry.

CHAPTER 2. CONCEPT OF INDUSTRIAL POLICIES

2.1 Stages of industrial policy development

Based on the marketing basis of industrial policy, the following stages of its development and implementation can be assumed:

1. Development of the product specialization of the industry and its refinement, which is recommended for the industrial complex for long-term development, the adherence to which not only creates conditions for the effective development of commercial structures, but also serves as an object of state support. This information will make it possible to assess the achieved and expected economic results of the production and exchange of goods, the prospects for the development of markets for these goods in the short and medium term, and to work out a state strategy for the development of industry.

2. Formation of a promising group of goods (product groups), the production of which can become effective, provided that certain support measures are taken (promising product specialization). These product groups are being developed to take urgent measures to stimulate entry into the relevant product markets; to work out a long-term strategy for the development of the industry.

Information on these groups of goods contains proposals for expanding access to commodity markets. It is drawn up in the form of a list of progressive goods indicating for each of them the possible sales markets, their capacity and government support and incentives, the release of expected incomes to them and budget replenishment. Analysis and generalization of this information will make it possible to form promising areas of industrial policy and link them with the investment program.

3. Formation of proposals for the development of domestic Russian markets for industrial and non-industrial goods. These proposals reflect the indicative dynamics of domestic consumption of industrial products for production and non-production purposes, associated with an increase in purchasing power and the revitalization of reproduction processes. They are developed on the basis of the information mentioned in clause 1 and forecasts of the development of domestic commodity markets. The demand for goods sold in this market is largely provided by the industry of the regions. This group includes consumer goods, manufactured goods consumed by enterprises, etc.

4. Development of production of commodity and technological specialization of the Russian industry. Industrial policy in the development of these industries may consist in finding ways to improve the quality of goods (services), to reduce their costs for the purpose of technical re-equipment of enterprises, the use of domestic and foreign progressive technology (possibly, in changing the set of basic technologies).

The formation of this direction of industrial policy is carried out by developing effective technological schemes for the production of goods based on advanced technologies, working out business plans and investment programs of industrial enterprises. The criteria for assessing their effectiveness can be the prices and quality of similar foreign products, taking into account the customs policy.

5. Formation of the state investment program for the development of industry. This program defines the commodity directions of targeted investments, corresponding to the commodity specialization of the industry, specific investment objects, sizes, sources and efficiency of investments. The investment program is a tool for regulating structural changes and follows from the product and technological specialization of the economy.

6. Development of foreign economic relations. This section contains an analysis of the existing goods, their assessment and development of proposals for the expansion of commodity industry in Russia, provides a list of regions and countries for the export and import of goods for effective exchange of goods; the policy of Russia's participation in the international division of labor is being formed.

In order to enter world markets with Russian goods amid the economic depression, it is necessary to create a state mechanism to support exporters. For this, it is necessary to develop a policy of economically beneficial relationships with other partners: the CIS countries, near and far abroad.

2.2 Prospects for the development of technological specialization of industry

To regulate the structural transformations of industrial production on the basis of maximizing market results and developing a commodity specialization of the industrial complex, it is necessary to carry out:

Marketing research to identify the needs of the above-mentioned markets in goods, to identify promising goods of Russian producers and opportunities to enter markets, taking into account the time factor;

Evaluation of the efficiency of production and sales of planned products by industrial enterprises of Russia;

Optimization of investments in the production and technological base for the production of goods selected as a result of marketing research, taking into account reasonable requirements for production efficiency and restrictions on the use of natural resources.

The formation of commodity specialization should provide a purposeful structural restructuring of industry with a focus on the production of competitive goods that are in stable demand. For the Russian industry, this issue has not yet been resolved. At the same time, the market situation and the existing production and scientific potential allow the development of industry in the following directions:

Strengthening its focus on domestic markets for high-tech products and cost-effective commodity markets;

Ensuring domestic consumer demand for industrial goods and services.

Commodity and technological specialization is based on the existing material and technical base, taking into account its sufficient scientific and technical level and scientific groundwork for development, the need for the fullest use of potential and real opportunities for the production of competitive products. This is also reflected in industrial policy, which ensures the concentration of society's resources in the selected areas of economic development and is implemented through a long-term industrial development program. State regulation creates conditions for the purposeful implementation of the structural restructuring of industry based on the effective use of the accumulated, developing and attracted scientific and technical potential and investments.

The program for the development of Russian industry should be implemented in stages using a system of economic levers and incentives:

1. It is necessary to return the leading position of Russian producers in the Russian market of industrial goods and services.

2. Russian manufactured goods must regain their place in the CIS markets.

3. Russian manufactured goods should enter the markets of Eastern Europe and developing countries.

4. Russian manufactured goods should be sold in sufficient volume on the markets of developed capitalist countries.

At each stage, the criterion for evaluating goods is their competitiveness.

The industry of Russia has sufficient priority to enter some world markets with a number of goods, perhaps somewhat overlooked earlier. These are the arms and aerospace markets. The technological specialization of the industrial complex is primarily manifested in the sectoral structure. In market conditions, it is determined by a set of basic technologies focused on the release of specific types of products, the state of the material and technical base of production, scientific and technological, patent and licensing backlog, own or obtained through scientific cooperation. The development of specific industries is carried out on the basis of business plans and investment programs.

Investment programs for the technical development of enterprises should provide for a qualitative change in their technical level, ensuring the transition to a new technological order. This requirement can be put forward when carrying out measures of state support for industrial enterprises. Commercial enterprises that effectively carry out their activities on product markets and do not need protectionist measures themselves maintain the required technical level of production through their own investments. They are not subject to the conditions and support measures under consideration.

To pursue an effective investment policy based on the developed product-technological specialization, it is necessary:

Develop a system of criteria for the socio-economic and technological assessment of investment programs of enterprises and their selection for implementation;

Develop a mechanism for lending investment measures and its use as the main source of investment resources or the use of other financial sources;

Design an economic scheme for financing investment programs based on equity participation of various categories of investors, taking into account the maximization of the interests of the state;

Develop a system of economic support for investment programs and projects carried out with the participation of foreign external investors;

Create a permanently operating system for monitoring the implementation of investment programs, taking into account the resources of the state investment program;

Create a legal framework and a mechanism for imposing sanctions for violation of contractual obligations in the field of urban investment.

2.3 Development of regional industrial policy

The development of industry in the former USSR was carried out in accordance with the "Scheme for the allocation of the productive forces of the USSR" systematically, taking into account the efficient use of natural and labor resources, the convenience of transporting goods from producers to consumers, leveling the levels of economic development in the regions. As a result of its implementation, a certain territorial structure of industry, technological and commodity specialization of the economy of the constituent entities of the Federation have now been formed. On its basis, interregional commodity flows are formed, the development of which is carried out on the basis of studying the needs of the regions for goods and services of external producers and the financial capabilities of consumers, taking into account the maximization of effective commodity exchange.

It seems that the function of regulating the structure of industry should be effectively performed by the regions of Russia themselves on the basis of the market movement of goods and the conclusion of interregional agreements on commodity exchange. The implementation of these operations is provided by the available primary statistical information.

The greatest attention in the regions deserves the production of goods that meet their own needs. It can be a wide range of goods related to the development of enterprises of national economic specialization in the region, domestic consumption goods, including local industry. Work with enterprises producing these goods can be based on forecasting effective demand, customs regulation of exports, subject to control over the quality and prices of goods, and regulation of internal Russian commodity exchange. This function is fully carried out by the administration of the region.

To assess the degree of satisfaction of the region's demand for goods and services, the following measures are required:

Conducting sociological research on the compliance of the purchasing power of the population and industrial enterprises with their technological and physical needs; purchasing power dynamics;

Study of the dynamics of changes in needs in the process of economic development;

Preparation of a regulatory framework for the consumption and production of a number of goods.

On this basis, an indicative plan for the development of production in the region and external relations to meet effective demand and a system of measures for economic regulation of the relevant markets can be developed.

CHAPTER 3. MAIN DIRECTIONS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY IN RUSSIA

3.1 The role of the state in the formation of the economic and industrial policy of Russia

In Russia, despite the sharp degradation of education and science, the potential of highly qualified labor and intellectual resources is still preserved. Another huge and still poorly used reserve of acceleration is associated with the few knowledge-intensive industries in which Russia still, despite the losses it has suffered, remains competitive. First of all, these are the nuclear and aerospace industries, the production of modern weapons. The realities of our time clearly show that it is necessary to consistently use all the capabilities of the state in the struggle for the interests of domestic producers, primarily in competitive sectors of the economy.

The main prerequisite for accelerated economic growth is an increase in the volume of effective investments in production and the infrastructure serving it. This can only be achieved with the help of an active, purposeful and consistent government policy. The very formulation of the problem - the maximum possible acceleration of economic growth - requires the full use of all available sources of investment: both private, Russian and foreign, and public. Comparison of the potential of these two sources leads to the conclusion that the main role should be played by private investment, primarily of Russian origin. The share of state capital investments has an auxiliary, but important role - financing of programs that are not very attractive to private investors, but useful for improving investment conditions in Russia, as well as participation in financing key investment projects that cannot be fully transferred to private investors or are inappropriate.

To achieve a significant increase in the volume of private investment, it is necessary to significantly improve the ratio between the profitability of investments and the level of business risk in the country, to make the investment climate in Russia competitive by world standards. In order to direct financial flows to sectors of the economy, the development of which meets the long-term interests of Russia, it is necessary to create there more attractive investment conditions in comparison with other possible options for the use of funds. Until such conditions are created, there continues to be a significant outflow of capital from the country.

Currently, an extremely favorable situation has developed for the Russian economy in terms of the availability of financial resources. Processes associated with the strengthening of the ruble - a reduction in the share of expenses for servicing external debt (due to an increase in the monetary value of the economy, the relative cost of external debt for the budget decreases).

To increase the efficiency and competitiveness of production, a transition to a new investment model is required, which allows not only to radically, 2-3 times, increase the volume of capital investments, but also to carry out a “double maneuver”: between sectors of the economy (in favor of final sectors) and between sources of investment ( in favor of borrowed funds). In addition, a sharp increase in the innovative content of investments is necessary (otherwise, the growth of investments will contribute to the reproduction of outdated technologies and preserve economic backwardness) and a significant, 2-3 times, increase in the rate of disposal of outdated equipment.

As a result of negative trends observed in the investment process, the main macro-indicator characterizing the competitiveness of the national economy (the share of high-tech and science-intensive products in exports) continues to decline. Now the total share of products of the fuel and energy complex and metallurgy is 75.4% of total exports.

You can count on this type of development, but only until alternative fuels appear. Moreover, assuming that oil prices no longer rise, Russia will face difficulties in increasing its export volumes. The devaluation potential will begin to accumulate again, and the economy will enter a pre-crisis state. All this necessitates the implementation by the state of active economic and, in particular, industrial policy measures aimed at realizing national competitive advantages and the potential of non-resource development of the economy.

3.2 Principles of industrial policy formation: domestic and world practice

Over the years of reforms in Russia, various conceptual approaches to the implementation of state industrial policy have been developed. The attitude to the very problem of carrying out a special policy aimed at reforming the industrial complex also changed. At the start of the reforms, the concept of economic policy was based on the idea that general economic reforms of the institutional environment, the creation of market mechanisms would allow solving the problems of industries and enterprises without government intervention.

The next stage in the development of the concepts of state industrial policy (1993-1995) is associated, first of all, with the activities of the State Committee for Industry of Russia. During this period, active attempts were made to study and use the experience of other countries, in particular, Japan. The main "whales" on which domestic developments were based were at first (1993-1994) stimulating domestic demand, providing industrial enterprises with cheap working capital to increase the utilization of existing capacities and searching for locomotive industries, the state support of which through intersectoral ties could provide impulse to the growth of industrial production. By 1995, the concept was based on the so-called "points of growth", the development of import substitution through a protectionist foreign economic policy, the acceleration of intraindustrial integration and the construction of production "chains" (FIG). For the most part, these developments were not brought to the stage of practical application or did not give the expected effect, primarily due to the lack of resources for the state to conduct an active state policy, and also due to the fact that it was not possible to achieve consensus on sectoral priorities and create specific mechanisms for the implementation of industrial policy.

Attempts to implement measures of state influence on the development of industry in the framework of the mid-term economic program for 1997-1998. were also not implemented due to a sharp change in the economic situation as a result of the 1998 crisis.

Currently, the basis of the state policy in the field of economic transformations in general and the reform of the industrial complex in particular is the Medium-term program of socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for 2008-2011. It declares the following basic principles of economic policy:

Creation of a level playing field for all enterprises, minimization of government interference, open economy, etc .;

The need for progressive structural changes (that is, ensuring diversification) and increasing the country's competitiveness;

The need to reform sectors related to human development;

The need to develop the innovation sphere;

Elimination of infrastructural and technological limitations with the active participation of business;

Inclusion of a number of measures related to direct government regulation: regulation of natural monopolies, creation and maintenance of infrastructure facilities.

However, the correctly formulated tasks of diversifying the economy in this program are not supported by the appropriate mechanisms for their implementation. As a result, the program, which contains three main scenarios of economic development, does not envisage solving the problem of doubling GDP by 2010, set by the President of Russia. In the most favorable scenario, a doubling of GDP is projected only by 2015. And in the near future, according to all three scenarios, a "growth pause" is predicted - at the level of 4.5% per year, which practically indicates the preservation of the passive economic policy of the state in the near future.

Two main approaches to understanding the essence and principles of industrial policy currently dominate in scientific circles in Russia. One, radical liberal, is that there should not be any industrial policy as such in the national economy. Sectoral proportions, capital overflow problems, and many other problems should be resolved at the junction of supply and demand in the market self-regulation procedures. Therefore, it denies the need to set development priorities and highlight the leading industries. Representatives of this approach believe that there are a number of priority sectors in the logic of post-industrial society, but that go beyond the economic sphere itself, on which the state should focus primarily. These include: the development of education, the development of health care, the implementation of military and judicial reforms.

Another approach is related to the so-called dirigiste model, based on the application of the principles of traditional industrial policy, including the allocation of sectoral priorities and government (financial and non-financial) support for these sectors. This model is based on excessive belief in the ability of the state to objectively determine priorities and form a long-term growth strategy. Protectionism is no less important in this model as a way to protect domestic producers from the competition of foreign firms. Thus, the model assumes an active industrial policy in the traditional (sectoral) sense of the word.

The example of a number of industrially developed countries shows that an active industrial policy solves many interrelated problems. In developed industrial countries, the essence of industrial policy is formulated as a purposeful systematic activity carried out with the help of the state for direct (administrative) and indirect (financial and economic) regulation of competitive, innovative and effective industrial development and the elimination of those obstacles in the course of this development that cannot be overcome by natural the course of events, that is, the mechanisms of self-regulation of the market.

The main directions of modern industrial policy, as the experience of developed countries shows, boil down to the following provisions:

It is recognized as important to make a radical transition to a national industrial policy, in which the state, business, scientific and public organizations and institutions are equal participants in its development and implementation;

The transition from sectoral industrial policy to a policy of a competitive industry is recognized as necessary;

The new industrial policy is combined with the transition to a knowledge-based economy, in which the production, distribution and use of knowledge and information are recognized as the main conditions for sustainable economic growth;

Industrial policy should no longer focus on specific industries and subsidies, as the effect of selectively supporting “winning industries” and providing selective assistance has become an expensive pleasure under tight budgets.

industrial policy state

CONCLUSION

So, in the course of writing this course work, the main goal was achieved - the essence of industrial policy, its role in the development of Russia today was studied. According to the Concept of Industrial Policy developed by the Ministry of Economy of the Russian Federation, industrial policy is a set of measures implemented by the state in order to increase the efficiency and competitiveness of domestic industry and to form its modern structure, contributing to the achievement of these goals. Industrial policy is carried out in the general mainstream of the state economic policy aimed at structural transformations and the growth of social production.

The instruments of industrial policy were also considered, including: budgetary, tax, monetary, institutional, foreign economic and investment policy. The main stages of its development and implementation have been studied.

One of the most important stages is the development of the product specialization of the industry and its refinement, which is recommended for the industrial complex for future development. This information will make it possible to assess the achieved and expected economic results of the production and exchange of goods, the prospects for the development of markets for these goods in the short and medium term, and to work out a state strategy for the development of industry. Then a promising group of goods (product groups) is formed, the production of which can become effective if certain support measures are taken (promising product specialization). Information on these groups of goods contains proposals for expanding access to commodity markets.

Formation of proposals for the development of domestic Russian markets for industrial and non-industrial goods is the third stage in the development and implementation of industrial policy. The demand for goods sold in this market is largely provided by the industry of the regions. This group includes consumer goods, manufactured goods consumed by enterprises, etc.

At present, in order to enter world markets with Russian goods in the conditions of an economic depression, it is necessary to create a state mechanism to support exporters. For this, it is necessary to develop a policy of economically beneficial relationships with other partners: the CIS countries, near and far abroad.

Putting forward the task of accelerating economic growth, it is important to soberly assess the peculiarities of the current situation in Russia, to understand how it differs from the situation of those countries that have successfully solved the problem of accelerated development in the past decades. There is not and cannot be one strategy for all countries. The art of the reformer, whose function the state is called upon to play, is to choose the optimal strategy that takes into account the unique characteristics and characteristics of the country during the period of reform.

All this speaks of the need for an active state economic policy in Russia. At the same time, the main tasks of state economic policy should be associated with the creation of conditions:

To retain the available resources within the country, as well as to attract additional funds from abroad, which, without government intervention, with free intercountry competition in the context of globalization, would be placed outside the national economy;

To attract and efficiently use these resources in those sectors of the national economy that are most promising from the point of view of long-term development tasks, even if the current purely market, conjuncture factors create temporary advantages for other sectors that are less promising in the long term.

The program of accelerated economic growth should provide for the intensification of state investment policy. The key issue in solving this problem is the attraction and effective use of huge financial resources. And Russia still has a chance for a major investment maneuver.

But the preservation of the current trends in the existing investment model, which fundamentally does not allow for the modernization of fixed assets, the weighted structure of the economy within the framework of its export-raw material model and the associated low rates of decrease in the energy and electrical intensity of production, weak innovative activity do not allow us to break into the trajectory of accelerated economic growth in the medium term.

Thus, industrial policy, as the core of the general economic policy of the state, should be associated, first of all, with the implementation of innovative, investment and structural restructuring of industrial production. Industrial policy should contribute to the expansion and creation of new markets, access to a competitive level of production, increase in profitability of enterprises, and ensure their leading role in the market of industrial goods and services.

It seems that for Russia, which lags significantly behind the post-industrial countries, industrial policy should solve a two-pronged problem. On the one hand, the task of opportunistic modernization of the economy, by solving its most acute current problems and stimulating economic growth. On the other hand, the task of defining a long-term strategy for the country's economic development, which ensures more rapid development in comparison with developed countries.

REFERENCES

1. Artemov A., Brykin A., Shumaev V. About measures for innovative development of light industry // The Economist. - 2007. - No. 10.

2. Artemiev V.I. Industry of Russia. - M .: INFRA-M, 2006.

3. Begar VV, Shushkintsev NB Russia in the world market of high technologies // The Economist. - 2008. - No. 1.

4. Bose E. Infrastructure for translating business interests to the state level: state economic policy and the business community Economist. - 2008. - No. 4.

5. Vasiliev V.P. State regulation of the economy (schemes and statistics). - M .: Business and Service, 2007.

6. Vinslav Y. Federal industrial policy: towards the definition of priorities in the context of the results and trends of the country's newest industrial evolution // The Economist. - 2008. - No. 1-2.

7. Gazimagomedov R. Features of modern industrial policy: theory and practice. - M .: Economics, 2008.

8. Granberg A. Problems and paradoxes of regional policy in the Russian Federation // The Economist. - 2008. - No. 11.

9. Grigoriev L. The recipe for economic growth: “Repair on the go” should replace the modernization of the economy // RER. - 2009. - No. 5.

10. Ivanter V., Uzyakov M. Innovative development option: long-term forecast // Economic Issues. - 2008. -№11.

11. Kapkanshchikov S.G. State regulation of the economy: textbook. - M .: KNORUS, 2006.

12. Knyaginin V., Shchedrovitsky P. Modern national industrial policy of Russia. Regional aspect. - M .: RSPP, 2008.

13. Konstantinov D. Development of industrial production in 2008 // The Economist. - 2009. - No. 3.

14. Kryukov R.V. State regulation of the national economy: Lecture notes. - M .: Prior - published, 2006.

15. Minaker P. Transformation of regional economic policy // Economic Issues. - 2007. - No. 3.

16. Nekipelov A. On strategic attitudes and economic policy of the federal authorities // RER. - 2009. - No. 5.

17. Khodov L.G. State regulation of the national economy. - M .: Economist, 2006.

18. Tsvetkov V. Reinforce innovative development with industrial policy // The Economist. - 2008. - No. 3.

19. Black L. Priority approaches to structural restructuring // The Economist. - 2008. - No. 12.

20. Shukshin S.N. Problems of the implementation of the industrial policy of the Russian Federation // Problems of Economics. - 2009. - No. 7.

21. Yasin E., Yakovlev O. Competitiveness and modernization of the Russian economy // Economic Issues. - 2008. - No. 10.

Ivanter V., Uzyakov M. An innovative development option: a long-term forecast // Voprosy ekonomiki. - 2008. -№11.- p.22.

State industrial policy is one of the most discussed concepts in the domestic economic literature. Discussions are conducted both on the content of the concept of industrial policy and on the directions of implementation of industrial policy in Russia.

The term "industrial policy" entered the Russian economic literature in the early 1990s and was borrowed from Western economic literature, the original name is "industrial policy". The borrowing of the concept of industrial policy by scattered specialists has led to the fact that in the domestic literature there are different interpretations of the content of industrial policy.

In the domestic literature, along with the term "industrial policy", the term "structural policy" is also used, which has remained from the time of the state-planning concept; often these two terms are given synonymous meaning. In Western literature, structural policy is understood as institutional transformations, such as privatization, reform of monopolies, assistance to the development of small and medium-sized businesses, etc.

The evolution of views and the need for a common terminology led to the following interpretation of industrial policy.

Industrial policy is defined as a set of government actions aimed at purposefully changing the structure of the economy by creating more favorable conditions for the development of certain (priority) sectors and industries.

Another definition of industrial policy was given by L.I. Abalkin.

Industrial policy is a system of measures aimed at progressive changes in the structure of industrial production in accordance with the selected national goals and priorities. The central issue and subject of industrial policy are intersectoral proportions and structural shifts in industry, and not issues of industrial development in general and, say, intrasectoral competition.

Finally, the definition of industrial policy given by the specialists of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation, industrial policy is a set of measures implemented by the state in order to increase the efficiency and competitiveness of domestic industry and to form its modern structure that contributes to the achievement of these goals. Industrial policy is a necessary complement to structural policies aimed at promoting social welfare. When developing an industrial policy, it is important to define goals and priorities set on the basis of strategic guidelines for the production and commercial activities of economic entities and social activities of the state.

As follows from these definitions, the implementation of industrial policy presupposes the presence of clear government priorities in relation to the sectors of the national economy. The purpose of industrial policy is to change the existing sectoral structure of the national economy, to increase the share of priority sectors in the created national product.

Industrial policy pursues different goals than industry policy. If the sectoral policy pursues the goal of increasing the national economic efficiency of the industry and is implemented mainly through short-term measures, then the industrial policy pursues the goal of increasing the efficiency of the national economy as a whole, eliminating cross-sectoral problems and ensuring progressive changes in the structure of production of the social product, which requires a long-term horizon of decision-making.

Among the main instruments of the state's industrial policy are the following:

1) instruments of budgetary policy: the provision of various kinds of subsidies and loans from the state budget, the implementation of state investment policy in certain sectors of the economy in order to develop the production base, infrastructure facilities, the formation of growth poles, etc.

2) tax policy instruments: the introduction of a different taxation regime depending on the industry, the provision of tax benefits in priority sectors, an accelerated depreciation procedure. The use of different taxation regimes in different industries and regions can have a significant stimulating function, changing the costs and sectoral profitability of production, which, in turn, affects the sectoral structure of investments in fixed assets, redirecting investments to priority sectors of the national economy and increasing their competitiveness.

3) instruments of monetary policy aimed at regulating the level of monetization of the economy, the volume of savings and lending in the national economy, as well as the exchange rate of the national currency: discount rate, open market operations, reserve requirement.

4) institutional policy instruments: improving property relations; stimulating the transition of enterprises to more efficient forms of business organization; change of property relations privatization and nationalization; licensing; legislative formation and support of new market institutions, market infrastructure.

5) instruments of foreign economic policy: export promotion (export credits and guarantees, customs and tax incentives, subsidies), import or export restrictions (customs tariffs, quotas, anti-dumping investigations, establishment of technological and environmental regulations and standards), changes in trade duties, membership in international economic organizations and the conclusion of customs unions.

6) investment policy instruments: creation of a favorable investment climate and assistance in attracting investments in those industries, the development of which is a priority for the state;

7) training and retraining of specialists for priority industries.

Thus, the implementation of industrial policy presupposes significant government intervention in the functioning of the economic system. This raises the question of the justification for its implementation, especially within the framework of the currently dominant liberal-market economic concept (neoclassical theory) and the assessment of its effectiveness.

Within the framework of neoclassical theory, industrial policy is viewed as an illegal state intervention in the economy, distorting the action of market mechanisms and hindering the efficient (optimal) allocation of resources. According to this point of view, the state is not able to determine the true points of growth, therefore, any priorities of the state in relation to sectors and industries will lead to a decrease in overall economic efficiency.

In accordance with the liberal market concept, the following main arguments against industrial policy can be made.

1. Industrial policy distorts market signals and, accordingly, leads to ineffective decisions of business entities at the micro level, which leads to the emergence of more significant imbalances.

2. The ability to set government priorities for the development of specific sectors can lead to lobbying and corruption, as a result of which priorities will be given to inefficient sectors.

3. The state cannot accurately determine the priorities of industrial policy in the long term. The experience of most countries shows that industrial policy instruments are ineffective in the long term.

4. The structure of the modern economy, characterized by the predominance of large diversified companies, reduces the ability to regulate certain industries and sectors.

The question arises as to what justifies government intervention in the natural development of the national economy.

The arguments for industrial policy are.

1. The market is effective only with relatively small deviations from the optimum. Eliminating large structural imbalances requires government intervention.

2. Market actors when making decisions are guided, as a rule, by short-term goals, which can lead to deviations from the long-term optimum.

3. The operation of the market mechanism can lead to high social and political costs to society.

4. Emerging industries during the period of formation may turn out to be uncompetitive due to unfavorable initial conditions.

Thus, the question arises of assessing the effectiveness of industrial policy. In what conditions it will contribute to an increase in social welfare, and in what not.

The following main goals of industrial policy can be cited:

1) ensuring national security and reducing dependence on external factors;

2) solving social problems and ensuring employment;

3) ensuring the competitive advantages of certain industries;

4) stimulation of investment activity in target industries by ensuring favorable conditions for functioning, especially in industries that have a large indirect effect on the development of the national economy; etc.

Industrial policy, as a rule, involves the creation of more favorable conditions for the development of priority sectors and restraining growth in some other sectors of the national economy.

Consequently, as a criterion for assessing the effectiveness of industrial policy, one can use the net gain of the national economy from the acceleration of the rate of development of some industries and the deceleration of the rate of development of others. However, there are serious methodological difficulties associated with the measurement of this indicator.

Thus, we can conclude that the implementation of industrial policy is justified in the context of a serious structural imbalance in the economy, which cannot be eliminated only under the influence of the market mechanism, which necessitates government intervention.

The following levels of industrial policy can be distinguished:

1. The level of state industrial policy. At this level, the formation and implementation of measures for macrostructural transformations, for creating favorable conditions for such transformations and for adapting or neutralizing their unfavorable consequences, takes place and is ensured.

2. The sectoral (sectoral) level of industrial policy determines the specific goals and measures of the state in relation to a particular industry in a broad or narrow sense.

3. The regional level of industrial policy determines the goals and measures of the state in relation to the industrial development of individual regions.

Due to the fact that industrial policy affects the functioning of the entire national economy, in order to make decisions regarding the choice of goals and priorities of industrial policy, a thorough analysis of the state of the national economy and determination of a long-term strategy for the socio-economic development of the state is required. In this regard, it is customary in the economic literature to distinguish the following three types of industrial policy:

1) internally oriented (import substitution);

2) export-oriented;

3) innovation-oriented (as a special case, resource-saving).

Internally oriented industrial policy

The import substitution model is based on the strategy of ensuring domestic demand through the development of national production. An important component of the import substitution policy is the protectionist policy on the part of the state, maintaining a low exchange rate of the national currency and stimulating the production of products that replace imported analogs.

The main positive results of the application of internally oriented industrial policy are:

Improving the structure of the balance of payments;

Provision of employment and, as a consequence, the growth of domestic effective demand;

Reducing the dependence of the economy on the outside world;

Development of fund-creating industries due to the growing demand for buildings, structures, machinery and equipment.

The negative results of the implementation of import substitution can be associated with the following processes:

Weakening of the effect of international competition in the domestic market of the country and, as a consequence, the technological lag of the national economy from developed countries;

Creation of unduly favorable conditions for domestic producers, which, in turn, may lead to a weakening of their competitiveness;

Ineffective micro-level governance;

Saturation of the domestic market with lower quality domestic products due to protectionist measures of the state restricting access to the market for high-quality imported products.

Examples of the implementation of an internally oriented industrial policy (import substitution) are India (1960-1980s), France (1950-1970s), Japan (after World War II) and China (1970-1980s). ), USSR, DPRK.

Export-oriented industrial policy

The main task of the export-oriented industrial policy is to promote the development of export industries, whose products are competitive in the international market. Among the instruments used by the state in the implementation of this type of industrial policy are:

Establishment of tax and customs privileges for exporting enterprises, providing them with preferential loans;

Pursuing a policy of weak exchange rate of the national currency;

Measures to create favorable conditions for the development of export-oriented and related industries;

Export infrastructure development;

Simplification of the customs regime.

The main advantages of the export-oriented model are:

Strengthening the integration ties of the national economy with the world economy and, accordingly, access to technologies and resources;

Development of competitive industries, which provides a multiplier effect of the development of the national economy as a whole, both along the chain of inter-industry ties, and due to the growth of effective demand from the population employed in these industries;

The inflow of foreign exchange resources into the country due to the growth of exports;

Attraction of additional investments, including foreign ones.

The most successful examples of the implementation of the export-oriented development model are South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong (1960-1980s), Chile, China (1980-1990s) and India (1990s), in a wide understanding of industrial policy (as a structural policy), this includes the US agrarian policy.

At the same time, there are also unsuccessful attempts to implement such a model of industrial policy. First of all, these are Mexico, Venezuela and a number of other countries of Latin America (1980s).

Despite the significant benefits that society can receive from the implementation of export-oriented industrial policy, under some conditions it can lead to negative consequences.

For example, in the case when export-oriented growth is realized at the expense of the raw materials sector of the national economy, which may be dictated, for example, by political or financial reasons, the following negative processes may occur:

Deepening the raw material orientation of the economy;

The growth of corruption in government bodies responsible for the regulation of foreign trade operations;

The outflow of labor and financial resources from the manufacturing industry to the extractive industry, which negatively affects the long-term competitiveness of the national economy (for example, Venezuela);

Decrease in innovation activity due to the weakening of the manufacturing industry ("Dutch disease");

Stagnation in the manufacturing industry leads to the need to import new equipment and other high-tech products from abroad, making the country dependent on foreign manufacturers (similar processes are currently taking place in Russia).

It should be noted that the export of raw materials can serve as a source of economic growth only in the short term. Long-term prospects for the development of the national economy with a raw material export orientation are dubious.

However, the negative consequences of the implementation of the export-oriented model arise not only in the case of an orientation towards the export of raw materials, an example can be Mexico, where the orientation of the country's economy towards the export of highly processed products assumed the use of a significant share of imported components in its production, which made the economy of this country dependent on external suppliers. When the cost of labor in Mexico increased, the products assembled in Mexico ceased to be competitive in the global market.

Practice shows that failures in the implementation of export-oriented industrial policy were mainly associated with a decrease in the diversification of the national economy and an increase in the role of industries dependent on the situation on the world market, which, when the situation on the world market for exported products deteriorated, led to a crisis.

When choosing this type of industrial policy, it is necessary to take into account the scale of the country, the level of scientific and technological development, and the availability of production resources. In this regard, two types of export orientation arise.

The first type is due to the insignificance of the size of the national economy and the relatively simple structure of the economy, which leads to the relative disadvantage of developing import substitution due to limited domestic demand. Singapore is an example.

The second type is caused by the country's significant competitive advantage over other countries. An example is the People's Republic of China, which possesses a huge reserve of cheap labor, which, in the context of a saturated domestic market, makes it necessary to look for new sales markets abroad. At the same time, predominantly extensive methods of expanding production significantly reduce the possibilities for the development of high-tech production.

So, the main advantages of an export-oriented industrial policy are international cooperation, improving the competitiveness of national industry, deepening integration into the international division of labor. However, one should fear a decrease in export diversification, which increases the dependence of the national economy on external conditions.

Innovation-oriented industrial policy

This type of industrial policy is fundamentally different from those described above. The main task in the implementation of this policy is to intensify innovation and the introduction of new technologies at domestic enterprises.

Considering that innovative activity has a significant lag between investing in an innovative project and its payback (payback period) and a high risk of no return on investments, investment decisions that are profitable from the point of view of society at the level of economic entities may not always be made, since short-term predominates in their behavior. goals.

Numerous researchers note that the higher the level of competition (less the level of concentration) in the industry, the less inclination of firms to invest in innovative development, and the main source of financing for innovation is the economic profit received by firms with monopoly power in the market. Therefore, the state should stimulate this type of activity and direct it in the right direction, especially in the case of industries with a low level of concentration.

The positive aspects of using an innovative type of development are:

Acceleration of scientific and technological progress;

Increasing the competitiveness of products in the international and domestic markets;

The growing demand for highly qualified labor force, which stimulates the population to receive quality education;

The stability of the balance of payments and the exchange rate of the national currency, ensured by the high competitiveness of products.

Intensive development of asset-creating industries, mainly mechanical engineering, as well as industries with a high degree of product processing, which are the basis for the economy of any industrialized country.

Despite its great attractiveness, innovation-oriented industrial policy has not been used so often in world practice, this is due to a number of difficulties associated with its implementation:

1) the need to attract significant investments in the development of R&D infrastructure and renewal of the basic production assets of the industry, which, as a rule, requires the attraction of significant external borrowings;

2) the financial vulnerability of national enterprises at the initial stage leads to the need to use protectionist measures and non-market methods to stimulate R&D, which often meets with resistance at the state level;

3) national educational and vocational institutions, as a rule, are unable to meet the growing need for a highly qualified workforce, therefore, the implementation of this type of development should be accompanied by the implementation of various programs to increase the educational level of the population, as well as increase the quality of education.

Given the high capital intensity of the innovation model, it is usually applied selectively in the most competitive industries. However, the overall effect of this model applies to all sectors of the national economy.

Countries such as Japan (1970-1990s), South Korea (1980-1990s), the USA, and the countries of the European Union can be cited as examples of the implementation of the innovative development model.

Note that the application of one or another type of industrial policy leads to a redistribution of factors of production in priority sectors of the economy, which reduces the opportunities for the development of other sectors. For this reason, examples of mixed types of industrial policy are very rare.

Industrial policy has a dynamic aspect, and after achieving the goals set by it, its priorities should be adjusted in accordance with the changed economic conditions and the existing structure of the economy. For this reason, practically in any developed country, all three identified types of industrial policy were implemented in one form or another.

Based on the analysis of world experience in carrying out structural transformations, the following strategy for the implementation of industrial policy that is optimal for society can be identified.

Therefore, it is necessary to take into account the dynamic nature of industrial policy - over time, the need to stimulate the development of selected industries disappears, there is a need to stimulate other industries.

Depending on the chosen strategy of industrial policy, the sectoral policy of the state in each specific industry should be determined.

According to the Concept of Industrial Policy developed by the Ministry of Economy of the Russian Federation, industrial policy is a set of measures implemented by the state in order to increase the efficiency and competitiveness of domestic industry and to form its modern structure, contributing to the achievement of these goals.

Industrial policy is carried out in the general mainstream of the state economic policy aimed at structural transformations and the growth of social production.

The goals and priorities of industrial policy are developed on the basis of strategic guidelines set for the production and commercial activities of economic entities of the market, as well as for the social activities of the state.

Further, let us briefly interrupt our acquaintance with industrial policy and say a few words about competitiveness, since this is one of the most important components of the market economy, permeating all levels and relationships between market actors.

Within the framework of the concept of competitiveness, several of its levels are considered, between which there is a fairly close interdependence: the competitiveness of a product, the competitiveness of a manufacturer, sectoral competitiveness and country competitiveness.

Within the scope of the topic under consideration, we will be more interested in sectoral and country competitiveness.

The development of the international division of labor has led to a certain specialization of countries in world markets, depending on the degree of competitiveness of a particular industry. So in the United States, the most competitive industries are aviation, aerospace, unique mechanical engineering, automotive, computer production and information technology development. In Japan, competitive industries include electronics and electrical engineering, automotive, shipbuilding, machine tools and robotics. China has created competitive industries for the production of cheap mass products - clothing, footwear.

Among the Russian industries, the most competitive in the world market are aviation and aerospace, instrument making, shipbuilding, and certain subsectors of the military-industrial complex and fuel and energy complex. However, the bulk of domestic machinery and equipment, unfortunately, is not competitive, as evidenced by the low share of finished machinery and equipment in domestic exports (7-9%).

Country competitiveness is essentially a synthetic indicator that unites all the other listed levels of competitiveness and characterizes the country's position in the world market.

In its most general form, country competitiveness can be defined as the country's ability in conditions of free competition to produce goods and services that meet the requirements of the world market, the implementation of which increases the welfare of the country and its individual citizens.

Many methods and indicators are being developed to analyze and measure the level of country competitiveness, but at the moment the most adequate reflection of the country's competitiveness, among others, is the competitiveness indicator developed by the international organization World Economic Forum in 1986. This indicator is used in the analysis of industrialized countries, newly industrialized countries and countries with economies in transition.

When calculating this indicator, multifactorial vector models are used, taking into account 381 indicators, which are grouped into 8 aggregated factors: internal economic potential, foreign economic relations, government regulation, credit and financial system, infrastructure, management system, scientific and technical potential, labor resources. In addition, objective indicators for each country when compiling a rating (and this is about 70% of all indicators) are supplemented by subjective factors - expert assessments of analysts, opinion polls of heads of large corporations and leading economic experts.

Russia as a country with an economy in transition was included in the calculation of this indicator in 1995. and then took 48th place, yielding to all industrialized countries and ahead of only a few developing countries and countries with economies in transition. The strongest sides of the Russian economy in terms of global competitiveness were recognized as scientific and technological potential and labor resources, and the weakest were the role of the state in the economy, the system of enterprise management and the credit and financial sphere.

Various negative structural changes, in particular, such as the energy intensity of production, depreciation of fixed assets, the lack of direct investment in production and in scientific and technical research and development (these problems will be considered later in this work), also lead to a drop in the overall competitiveness of Russia.

Therefore, in the coming years, in order to increase the competitiveness of domestic products, it is necessary to prepare and implement a technological breakthrough in competitive industries, as well as create conditions for domestic producers equal to those of their foreign competitors in the domestic market (i.e. optimize tax policy, take into account the cost of production, develop and introduce protectionist measures).

At the moment, among the competitive advantages of Russia in the world market still remain:

· Rich natural resources and a developed mineral resource base;

· Educated, skilled and relatively cheap labor force;

· Availability of scientific and technical potential;

· Availability of capacities for the production of mass, relatively cheap products that can find sales in the domestic market and the markets of a number of developing countries.

The weakest points of the domestic industry are:

· General rather serious technological lag behind the world level;

· Inconsistency of the structure of industrial production with the parameters characteristic of the economies of developed industrial countries;

· Lack of appropriate infrastructure and skills in product marketing and service;

· Low level of management and organization, especially in the management of financial resources;

· Weak investment activity and budget deficit.

Another unpleasant feature of Russian production is the fact that, despite the nature of our export being based on raw materials, we import capital-intensive products and often precisely for the production of this very raw material. This is evidenced by the high share of expenses for the purchase of imported equipment in the cost of domestic exported goods. In such a situation, export becomes a hostage of import supplies. In addition, the development of export-oriented raw materials industries is completely dependent on the global situation in the field of commodity prices, and it would not be very reasonable to link the country's overall economic recovery with the growth in the profitability of export-oriented raw materials industries, since we are leaving our potential economic growth at the mercy of exogenous factors. which is not acceptable for the development of the Russian economy, as well as any other country.

So, having got acquainted with the “facade” of industrial policy, we will penetrate into its “kitchen” and consider the methods and tools for implementing industrial policy.

The goals of the state economic policy and its priorities

5. The main directions of the state economic policy in market conditions

6. Contradictions of the market mechanism of management and the need for government intervention in economic processes

7. Keynesian analysis of the causes of market economy instability, its tools and recommendations

8. The monetary concept of state influence on the economy

9. Objectives of fiscal policy and its main directions

10. Tax. Politics as a method of forming budget revenues and a method of stimulating influence on the economy

11. Government debt and its impact on economic processes

12. Problems and consequences of fiscal policy in modern Russia

13. The essence of monetary policy, its goals and instruments

5) Direct methods of regulation

14. The difference between Keynesian and monetarist approaches in the mechanism of monetary policy. Effectiveness of monetary policy

15. Policy of financial stabilization in the Russian Federation. State Debt of the Russian Federation

16. State. Banking regulation

17. Objective foundations of forecasting and planning in market conditions. The boundaries and possibilities of state. Forecasting and planning

18. Principles of forecasting the development of the national, regional and municipal economy

19. Government bodies for forecasting and planning: experience of the USA, EU countries, Japan

20. The structure of the state. Sectors. State Property, its subject-object character

21. Management of state property in Russia

22. Privatization as an instrument of state regulation in a market economy

23. Privatization as an element of the state's institutional policy in the period of market reforms

24. Evolution of forms of ownership in Russia. Features of Russian privatization

25. The role of the state in the regulation of monopoly processes and the development of competition

26. Foreign experience of antimonopoly activities. Forms of stimulating the development of a competitive environment. 2 models of antitrust regulation:

27. The main methods of work of government bodies on antimonopoly policy and support of entrepreneurship in the Russian Federation

28. Priority directions of the state scientific and technical policy of Russia

29. Industrial policy: content and goals in the transition to the market. Priorities of Russia's industrial policy at the macro level

30. Overcoming the industrial crisis: financial recovery and enterprise restructuring

31. Investment policy in the Russian Federation. Features of regulation of investment. Processes at the regional level

32. State regulation of income of the population. Preservation of state guarantees to the population

33. Pension system of the Russian Federation

34. State regulation of the labor market. Place and role of employment services

35. Reforming the housing and communal sector, education and health care systems

36. Basic principles and goals of regional economic policy

37. Ensuring the economic, social, legal and organizational foundations of federalism in the Russian Federation

38. Equalization of conditions for social-ec development of the region. Implementation mechanism is regional. State politicians

1. 29. Industrial policy: content and goals in the transition to the market. Priorities of Russia's industrial policy at the macro level

In industry, there are about two dozen sub-sectors - electric power, fuel industry, mechanical engineering, food, light industry, production of building materials, etc.

The industry is subdivided into extractive, including mining, and manufacturing. The manufacturing industry includes enterprises that process products of the extractive industries and the previous stages of the manufacturing industry, as well as enterprises for the processing of agricultural products. The enterprises of the extractive industry and agriculture make up the raw materials complex of the country.

Industrial policy Is a set of government actions aimed at changing the structure of the economy by creating favorable conditions for the development of priority sectors and industries.

Industrial policy focuses on overcoming market deficiencies. One of its main features is the limited availability of a particular resource. In order to weaken the dependence of the nat. economy from a limited resource and industrial policy is carried out. The scarcity of resources can be absolute (the absence of developed deposits of raw materials or their depletion), as well as relative (high costs and, as a result, prices).

The first important component of industrial policy is a clear definition of the strategy and, in accordance with this, promising industries. After that, this segment is "filled" with national private companies, the prerequisite for the existence of which becomes tough competition (which significantly increases efficiency and creates a basis for increasing export potential).

Main the principle according to which promising are selected. industries - the “principle of comparative advantage”.

In accordance with the generally accepted rule, a country cannot maintain competitiveness in many areas at the same time. The second important element of industrial policy is the curtailment of structurally depressed industries and, in some cases, their substitution with imports. The elimination of backward industries also creates an additional resource for the development of promising industries.

The third important element of industrial policy is the choice of a strategic market: internal or external. The market is not only an incentive for industrial policy, but also determines its priorities. There are two known options for industrial policy: import substitution and export-oriented.

One of the defining indicators of the effectiveness of industrial policy is the balance of payments. This is not just a calculated, monetary indicator, first of all, it is an indicator that allows you to determine the national strategy - which industries to develop or even create anew, and which ones to gradually withdraw from production, as ineffective in terms of indicators of competitiveness or expediency of their existence in the context of the international division of labor ...

Tasks:

Ensuring sustainable development and increasing production efficiency in the industrial complex.

Ensuring the implementation of the goals of economic policy, structural restructuring of the economy and the transition to an innovative type of development.

Increased competitiveness in the domestic and foreign markets.

Ensuring national security and reducing dependence on external sources.

Increasing the investment attractiveness of certain areas, which can have a significant effect in related industries.

Solving social problems.

Technical re-equipment of industries.

Entering the world economic process as an equal partner of the developed countries of the world, changing the direction of export of Russian manufacturers from raw materials to products of processing industries.

Rationalization of the location of production on the territory of Russia;

Ensuring the safety of production, and especially environmental safety, energy, chemical, metallurgical industries.

"