An Analysis of State Support for Non-State Armed Groups (NAGs) in a Triadic Context

The paper analyzes the shifts in government priorities in terms of support of big and medium manufacturing enterprises amid 2008—2009 and 2014—2015 crises. Based on the data of 2009, 2014 and 2018 surveys of Russian manufacturing firms, using logit regressions we identify factors that affect the receipt of financial and organizational support at different levels of government. The analysis shows that in 2012—2013 the share of manufacturing firms that received state support shrank significantly as compared to 2007—2008; moreover, the support concentrated on enterprises that had access to lobbying resource (such as state participation in the ownership or business associations membership). In 2016—2017 the scale of state support coverage recovered. However, the support at all levels of government was provided to firms that carried out investment and provided assistance to regional or local authorities in social development of the region, while the factor of state participation in the ownership became insignificant. The paper provides possible explanation for these shifts in the criteria of state support provision in Russia.

Download Full-text

Assessing the size of agricultural holdings

Voprosy Ekonomiki ◽

10.32609/0042-8736-2020-10-105-116 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 105-116

Author(s):

N. I. Shagaida

Keyword(s):

Russian Federation ◽

Vertical Integration ◽

Total Revenue ◽

Large Share ◽

State Support ◽

The Russian Federation ◽

Agricultural Organizations ◽

Business Entities ◽

To Receive

The article clarifies the concept of “agricultural holding”, using an approach to assessing the size on the basis of the total revenue of all agricultural organizations within the agricultural holding. It has been revealed that only 100 of the total number of agricultural holdings that were identified can be attributed to large business entities. They comprise about 3% of agricultural organizations in the country, while their share in the proceeds is about 37%. A large share of agricultural holdings — large business subjects under the control of Russian entities operate in one, and under the control of foreign legal entities — in three or more regions of the Russian Federation. Vertical integration within the framework of large agricultural holdings with different schemes for including the stages of processing and sale of products produced in their agricultural organizations allows them to receive advantages. Strengthening the role of large business entities in agriculture puts on the agenda the issue of differentiating approaches to taxation and state support in agriculture, depending on the size of the companies’ agricultural businesses.

Download Full-text

On the diversity of the effects of the state support for agriculture

Voprosy Ekonomiki ◽

10.32609/0042-8736-2019-4-59-73 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 59-73 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Nikolai M. Svetlov ◽

Renata G. Yanbykh ◽

Dariya A. Loginova

Keyword(s):

Agricultural Production ◽

The State ◽

Russian Regions ◽

Negative Effects ◽

State Support ◽

Soft Budget Constraints ◽

Institutional Conditions ◽

Positive Effects ◽

Production Factors ◽

Corporate Farms

In this paper, we assess the effects of agricultural state support of corporate farms on their revenues from agricultural production sales in 14 Russian regions that differ in technology, environment and institutional conditions. In addition to the direct effect of the state support, the indirect effects via labor and capital are revealed. For this purpose, we identify production functions and statistical models of production factors for each of these regions separately. We find out diverse effects of the state support on revenues among the regions. Positive effects prevail. Negative effects are mainly caused by labor reductions that follow subsidy inflows. Another cause of negative effects is the soft budget constraints phenomenon.

Download Full-text