The Factors of Investment Activity (On the Example of Tyumen Region)

About the author:

Natalia G. Semova, Cand. Sci. (Ped.), Associate Professor, Department of Mathematical Methods, IT and Systems of Management in Economics, Tyumen State University; semovang@mail.ru

Abstract:

This paper analyzes various scientific approaches on the state’s role in economy in general and in investment policy in particular. Now the role of the state in economy is growing all over the world. It is shown that scientific concepts follow conditionally two global directions. The first of them presumes that public policy can have either a positive or a negative impact on economic growth, depending on the priorities or selected tools. The second direction supposes that states aim at extracting rent, that all their activities are illegitimate as they try to maximize their share in the national income and, thereby, they take away resources from the private sector; they participate in investing, but intervene in conflicts and provide protection to privileged workers’ groups.

Empirical data represents investments in fixed assets and foreign direct investment at the level of the Tyumen Region, in comparison with other regions of the Urals Federal District. It is shown that at the present time in the Tyumen Region there is a decrease in the level of physical volume of investments in fixed assets. The structure of investment has been completely rebuilt over the past 15 years. This restructuring led to a threat of braking the further development of the region, the ineffectiveness of the infrastructure for supporting investment activities. It is noted that there are fundamental differences in the evaluation of the investment activities of the elites of the Tyumen Region and pro-government agencies.

Our results are reflected in the results of other independent agencies, e.g., RAEX (“RA Expert”). The risks of investment activity in the Tyumen region are mainly of an institutional nature. However, there are also social risks caused by skewed labor preferences of workers.

References:

1. Akindinova N., Kondrashov N., Cherniavsky A. 2016. “Trinadtsat’ sposobov provesti byudzhetnuyu konsolidatsiyu” [Thirteen Ways to Conduct Budget Consolidation]. Kommentarii o gosudarstve i biznese, 8-27 November, no 123, pp. 12-29. Higher School of Economy. 
2. Buchanan J. 1997. Sochineniya. Seriya: “Nobelevskie laureaty po ekonomike”, vol. 1. Fond ekonomicheskoy initsiativy. Edited by P. M. Nureev et al. Moscow: Taurus Al’fa.
3. Delovoy portal Pravitel’stva Tyumenskoy oblasti [Business Portal of the Tyumen Region Government]. Accessed on 5 February 2017. http://www.tyumen-region.ru/support/investments
4. Dobbin F. 2016. “Sravnitel’nyy i istoricheskiy podkhody v ekonomicheskoy sotsiologii” [Comparative and Historical Approaches in Economic Sociology]. Ekonomicheskaya sotsiologiya, May, vol. 17, no 3, pp. 37-74.
5. Dobbin F. 2013. Formirovanie promyshlennoy politiki: Soedinennye Shtaty, Velikobritaniya i Frantsiya v period stanovleniya zheleznodorozhnoy otrasli [Forging Industrial Policy: The United States, Britain, and France in the Railway Age]. Sotsial’naya teoriya series. Moscow: Higher School of Economy. 
6. Investitsionnaya deyatel’nost’ [Investment Activity]. Accessed on 5 February 2017. http://www.tyumen-region.ru/support/investments
7. Investitsionnyy portal goroda Tyumeni [Tyumen Investment Portal]. Accessed on 5 February 2017. http://invest.tyumen-city.ru/content/bazy-dannyh/pravovaja-baza
8. Komitet gosudarstvennoy statistiki Rossii [Russian State Statistics Commitee]. Accessed on 5 February 2017. http://www.gks.ru
9. Lapin N. I. 2005. “Antroposotsietal’nyy podkhod: metodologicheskie osnovaniya, sotsiologicheskie izmereniya” [Anthroposocial Approach: Methodological Grounds, Sociological Measurements]. Voprosy filosofii, no 2, pp. 17-29.
10. Natsional’nyy reyting sostoyaniya investitsionnogo klimata v sub”ektakh RF [The National Rating of Investment Capitall State in the RF Subjects]. http://asi.ru/investclimate/rating
11. North D., Wallis D., Weingast B. 2011. Nasilie i sotsial’nye poryadki. Kontseptual’nye ramki dlya interpretatsii pis’mennoy istorii chelovechestva [Violence and Social Orders. The Conceptual Framework for Interpreting the Written History of Mankind]. Moscow: Gaydar Institute.
12. North D. 2010. Ponimanie protsessa ekonomicheskikh izmeneniy [Understanding the Process of Economic Change]. Ekonomicheskaya teoriya series. Moscow: Higher School of Economy.
13. Nureyev R. M. 2017. Rossiya: varianty institutsional’nogo razvitiya [Russia: Options for Institutional Development]. Moscow: Yur. Norma: NITs INFRA-M.
14. O gosudarstvennoy podderzhke investitsionnoy deyatel’nosti v Tyumenskoy oblasti [On the State Support of Investment Activities in the Tyumen Region] of 8 September 2003, no 159 (ed. on 2 December 2014). Accessed on 5 February 2017. http://to72.minjust.ru/press/news/o-gosudarstvennoy-podderzhke-investicionnoy-deyatelnosti-v-tyumens...
15. Polanyi K. 2002. “Ekonomika kak institutsional’no oformlennyy protsess” [Economics as an Institutionalized Process]. Ekonomicheskaya sotsiologiya, vol. 3, no 2, pp. 62-73.
16. RF Government. Accessed on 5 February 2017. http://government.ru/activities/selection/301/25074
17. Romashkina G. F., Pecherkina I. F. 2016. “Kharakteristiki svyaznosti regional’nogo sotsial’nogo prostranstva” [Characteristics of the Connectivity of the Regional Social Space]. Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research, vol. 2, no 3, pp. 39-54. DOI: 10.21684/2411-7897-2016-2-3-39-54
18. Andrianova E. V., Arbitaylo I. Ya., Akhmedzyanova R. M., Dashina Ya. N., Kombarova T. V., Korepanov G. S., Pecherkina I. F., Stepanova M. V., Tarasova A. N., Khvoshchin A. S., Khudyakova M. V., Davydenko V. A., Romashkina G. F. 2015. Sotsiokul’turnaya dinamika — portret Tyumenskoy oblasti: kollektivnaya monografiya [Socio-Cultural Dynamics — A Portrait of the Tyumen Region]. Tyumen.
19. “Statisticheskiy ezhegodnik: stat. sb. Tyumenskaya oblast’ bez avtonomnykh okrugov” [Statistical Yearbook: Statistics Collection. Tyumen Region without Autonomous Districts], 2016, vol. III. In: Territorial’nyy organ Federal’noy sluzhby gosudarstvennoy statistiki po Tyumenskoy oblasti. Tyumen.
20. Fligstin N. 2013. “Arkhitektura rynkov: ekonomicheskaya sotsiologiya kapitalisticheskikh obshchestv XXI veka” [The Architecture of Markets: Economic Sociology of Capitalist Societies of the XXI Century]. Sotsial’naya teoriya series. Moscow: Higher School of Economy.
21. Aschauer D. 1990. Public Investment and Private Sector Growth. Washington (DC): Economic Policy Institute. 
22. Barro R. 1990. “Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth”. Journal of Political Economy, no 98, pp. 103-125.
23. Burawoy M. 1985. The Politics of Production: Factory Regimes under Capitalism and Socialism. Leningrad: Verso; N. Y.: Schocken Books.
24. Burawoy M., Lukács J. 1992. The Radiant Past: Ideology and Reality in Hungary’s Road to Capitalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25. Chandler A., Amatori E., Hikino T. 1997. Big Business and the Wealth of Nations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. EBSCO. Accessed on 6 February 2017. https://www.ebsco.com
27. Emerald Insight. Accessed on 6 February 2017. http://www.emeraldinsight.com
28. Jessop B. 1994. State Theory. Putting the Capitalist State in its Place. Cambridge: Polity Press.
29. Romer P. 1990. “Endogenous Technological Change”. Journal of Political Economy, vol. 98, pp. 79-102.
30. Scopus. Accessed on 6 February 2017. https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus