CC BY
40
ECONOMIC THEORY
удк 330.341 I.K. Babaytseva
STATE REGULATION OF INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES IN STRUCTURAL-TECHNOLOGICAL SHIFTS
The paper considers state regulation of structural-technological shifts. The author gives an original definition of structural transformation of economy and analyses its special features in modern conditions. Special attention is given to implementing innovative-strategic function of state.
Key words: structural and technological shifts, structural transformation of economy, technological way, modernization, innovative-strategic function of state.
И.К. Бабайцева
ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОЕ РЕГУЛИРОВАНИЕ ИНСТИТУЦИОНАЛЬНЫХ ИЗМЕНЕНИЙ СТРУКТУРНО-ТЕХНОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ СДВИГОВ
В статье рассматривается государственное регулирование структурно-технологических сдвигов. Дается авторское определение структурной трансформации экономики, анализируется ее специфика в современных условиях. Особое внимание уделено реализации инновационно-стратегической функции государства.
Ключевые слова: структурно-технологические сдвиги, структурная трансформация экономики, технологический уклад, модернизация, инновационно-стратегическая функция государства.
Challenges of establishment and development of institutional structures are inextricably linked with the transition to a new technological structure and with the formation of new innovative development model. In today's economy there are processes involving a wide adoption and dissemination of basic technological innovations. In the rapidly growing "new economy" old technological structures are replaced by new technological structures which imply fundamental changes in the combination of means of labor, subjects of labor and labor force in the production process. Problems faced by the Russian economy predetermine the need to systematize the knowledge about possible ways of evolutionary transformation of the economic, technological and institutional systems. In order to return to the ranks of developed nations Russia must quickly make the transition to the "new economy" by creating and implementing "breakthrough" technologies in the real sector of economy. It is necessary to enter international markets with intelligent databases, expert systems, microelectronics
and other knowledge-intensive technologies. All of this requires the establishment and development of respective institutions. Current worldwide change of technological structures significantly influences the development of new forms of economic institutions by transforming the behavior of economic agents compelling them to develop new strategy and tactics in a changing environment. Thus, the change of technological structures brings about institutional and structural changes in the economy [4, p. 113]. In turn, this calls for state regulation of the above processes.
During the formation of technological trajectories of the new technological order by accepting a considerable part of risk the state gives an opportunity for innovators to implement their scientific research projects in a highly competitive environment with a lack of demand for their results. Financial agents should have an ability to assess the prospects for commercialization of new knowledge and sometimes even initiate this process. When a growth trajectory of the new technological structure is formed and these
prospects become common property, such ability is not so important. In the growth phase of a technological structure rapid technology replication, accelerated increase in output of products which might actually be an imitation of already existing products on the market come to the forefront. As a consequence, during this phase the agents of production and industrial capital assume the leading role in technological development.
Cross-country quantitative analysis of the trajectories of technical and economic development has shown that the technical development of Russian economy follows the same trajectory as in other countries but it is significantly slower Relatively slow pace of technological development of the Soviet economy was due to its heterogeneous technological structure that complicated the timely transfer of resources for the development of new technologies. By the early 1990s simultaneous reproduction of the 3rd, 4th and 5th technological structures existing in the Soviet economy has stabilized. According to various assessments and available estimates at the current phase of the 5th technological structure which has reached the maturity phase its distribution in Russia is limited to the supporting sectors while the core sectors remain underdeveloped [1, p. 22]. At the core sectors of the 5th technological structure such as microelectronics, electronic engineering, radio engineering, opto-electronics, civil aviation, high-grade steel, composites and new materials, industrial equipment for high-tech industries, accurate electronic measurement instruments, equipment and devices for modern communication systems and computers compared with the level of the 1990 - 1991 there is a significant decline. It is very difficult to catch up with the world level of development of these technologies even with the help of vast investments.
In the mature phase of the dominant technological structure bridging the technological gap in its core sectors requires huge investments, while purchasing imported equipment allows to quickly meet the existing needs. That is what is happening in our country, as evidenced by the growth of the number of personal computers, the number of Internet users, the export volume of software services and other indicators of the increased use of the technologies of the 5th technological structure in supporting industries at a rate of about 20 - 50% per year. Thus the development of the 5th technological structure in Russia has a catch-ing-up and imitation character. This is evidenced by the relative dynamics of the spreading of its various components - the closer to the enduser, the higher the rate of spreading. The rapid expansion of the supporting industries of the 5th technological structure is based on imported technologies which hampers an adequate development of key technologies in its core. This means that the Russian economy is falling into the trap of unequal exchange with a foreign core of this technological structure where the bulk of intellectual rent is generated. According to the analysis of the spreading of new technological structure in different countries, its development in Russia also is delayed. But this lag occurs in the phase of embryonic de-
velopment and can be overcome in the growth phase. In order to do this it is necessary to master key manufacturing technologies of the core of the new technological structure before the large-scale restructuring of the global economy that will allow to receive intellectual rent on a global scale.
Russian science has sufficient potential of the accumulated knowledge and highly promising achievements, an adequate practical implementation of which can ensure leading position of Russian enterprises on the crest of the next long wave of economic growth. Russian scientists have significant achievements in the cloning technologies of organisms, stem cells and in the optoelectronic measurement. Science and industry in Russia have the necessary potential for innovation in the sphere of nanotechnology and nanomaterials.
With regard to the sectoral structure of economy structural changes can be de-scribed as significant, leading to a change in relations (correlations) between indus-tries due to their irregular dynamics. This involves a change in relative shares, scales and proportions, when the increase in one element and the decline of another are two sides of the same structural process. In contrast to the existing definitions, the author's interpretation of a structural shift refines this concept in relation to the sectoral structure of economy taking into consideration a point when changes in sectoral structure turn into a structural shift. This boundary is determined on the basis of the ranking of industries,
i.e. ranking them according to the proportion (percentage) in the economy: the greatest proportion corresponds to the first place (rank), the other places (ranks) are assigned in descending order according to the share of industry in the economy. In this case, changing the industry rank will testify not only about the structural changes but about the change in significance and priority which is regarded by the author as a structural shift.
The table shows changes in industry rankings which were due to many factors resulting in non-uniform growth rate of output in different industries.
The analysis of structural changes based on the changes in ranks revealed the following.
1. The most important industries according to their share in industrial output are fuel industry and machine building engineering and metalworking industry (these sectors alternately have 1 and 2 ranks). The fuel industry is distinctly export-oriented, the machine building and metalworking industry focuses on the domestic market.
2. In terms of intensity of structural processes the following industry groups are identified:
Rankings of industries (According to their share in total industrial output)*
№ n dustries 2000 2 001 20 03 2005 2006 2007 2009
1 Electricity 3 3 4 3 3 3 4
2 Fuel ind ustry 1 2 1 2 2 2 1
3 Ferrous metallurgy 5 5 5 5 4 4 3
4 Non-ferrous metallurgy 4 4 3 4 5 5 5
5 Chemical and Petrochemical industry 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
6 Machine building a nd metalworking 2 1 2 1 1 1 2
7 Timber, woodworking, pulp and paper 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
8 Building materials 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
9 _ight industry 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
* Source: Russia in Figures / / Goskomstat of Russia. Moscow, 2010. P143.
♦
♦
Implementing innovative and strategic function of the state [2, p. 416]
a) industries with significant structural changes: in the analysis they are indicated by the change of ranks of 3 places. This applies to the sectors of ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy;
b) industries with moderate structural changes: in the analysis they are indicated by the change of ranks of 2 places. This applies to the machine building industry, fuel industry, electric power industry;
c) industries without structural changes: there is no or virtually no change in rank.
This applies to woodworking, pulp and paper industry building materials industry, light industry, chemical and petrochemical industries.
The main trends of the industry are determined by the most important industry sectors: fuel, machine building, power generation. The priority should be given to sectors with high added value such as machine building and metalworking.
We define structural (sectoral) transformation of economy as a set of industry changes and shifts of qualitative and quantitative nature, occurring in the economy during the period of its market transformation. The concept of structural transformation of economy should be distinguished from its restructuring. Restructuring in the narrow sense is usually defined as one-time change in capital structure or ownership of the company in a broader sense it should be interpreted as any structural changes including changes in industries. Western experts regard restructuring as a way to respond to changing market conditions.
The structural transformation of the Russian economy means any qualitative and quantitative changes occurring in the industries during the period of market transformation. At the same time qualitative changes involve the compositional structure of industries: emergence of new industries, disappearance of old industries, transformation of existing industries taking into account changes in the sectoral identity.
The state becomes an indispensable participant in the innovation process by executing one of the most important functions - innovation and strategic function (Fig.1) that requires highest professionalism, strategic thinking and efforts by the state leaders, its agencies and public officials.
The need for active state involvement in the innovation process for developing and implementing a strategy of innovative breakthrough is determined by several factors: the state vision and responsibility are far beyond an individual entrepreneur or a group of entrepreneurs. The duty of the state is to have multi-dimensional and long-term vision, strategic decision making taking into account all possible consequences. The state creates climate for innovations, legal framework and norms for entrepreneurial innovative activity taking into account
its specific character and high risk. This climate exists either in a positive or negative form, the state is obliged to take responsibility for the choice of strategy and for the implementation of innovations in the non-market sector of the economy. The role of the state involves innovative development of fundamental sciences, public administration, defense, law enforcement, environmental monitoring, major environmental projects etc., the state can not stay away from the development and dissemination of innovations in the market sector of the economy It would be rash and dangerous to entrust the business in the market economy full responsibility for the development and dissemination of basic or even epochal innovations that determine competitiveness, efficiency and security of the entire national economy and the country as a whole. Such innovations are usually interdisciplinary have long-term and risky nature which is not attractive for private business, that is why the state should promote the development of innovative infrastructure and small innovative businesses. The state should be directly concerned with developing human resources for innovation breakthrough, an important area of the state responsibility is state regulation and protection of intellectual property both at home and abroad.
1. Барашов Н.П Модернизация экономики России в контексте теории длинных волн // Вестник СГСЭУ. 2009. № 5 (29).
2. Кузык Б.Н., Яковец Ю.В. Россия - 2050: стратегия инновационного прорыва. М., 2008.
3. Россия в цифрах: крат стат. сб. // Госкомстат России. М., 2010.
4. Русановский В.А. Долгосрочный экономический рост: технологический и структурно-институциональный аспекты. Саратов, 2007.
