Legal Instruments for Stimulating Interregional Competition for Investment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17059/2020-2-24Keywords:
investments, region, competition, state support, stimulation, tax remissions, regional economy, spatial econometrics, external effects, panel dataAbstract
In order to study the role of legal instruments in stimulating the spatial competition and economic integration of the entities of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to examine a system of interacting regions. Regional laws on investment promotion have been acting and improvingfor a long time. Thus, the paper examines the set of these laws and their impact on interregional integration and regional competition. The study identifies three levels of competition: the all-Russian competition, competition within federal districts, and competition between neighbouring regions. As benefits as instruments for attracting investments are applied in regions, they influence the decision to invest in other regions. Therefore, the developed econometric model of dynamic panel regression of investments assesses the economic interaction between the regions. The model “the dynamic panel regression of investments taking into account the competition between the regions” (DPRI-CR) includes stimulation instruments and spatially weighted variables related to regional benefits. The indicators for assessing regional spatial interaction are based on the coefficients of the similarity of the legal systems in two regions. Testing of the DPRI-CR demonstrates the exiting external positive, negative and neutral effects of investment benefits that significantly differ depending on the level of competition. An increase in the regional economic integration causes an increase in the positive and negative effects. Consequently, the investment policies that are aimed at increasing economic interaction should take into account the regions economic integration with the economies of the neighbouring regions, regions of the federal district and other entities of the country. The regions, which are closely integrated with the majority of regions, have the most opportunities to use the external effects. They can apply either “driving force of the economy” instruments to enhance positive effects or “driving force of the progress” instruments to increase their competitive position.References
Suslov, V. I., Bobylev, G. V., Valieva, O. V., Kravchenko, N. A. & Kuznetsov, A. V. (2015). Opredelenie napravleniy sovershenstvovaniya regionalnoy investitsionnoy politiki [Determining Ways to Improve Regional Innovation Policy]. Region: Ekonomika i sotsiologiya [Region: Economics and Sociology], 1, 117–196. (In Russ.)
Lapo, V. F. (2018). Otsenka vliyaniya regionalnykh metodov regulirovaniya na investitsionnuyu deyatelnost [Impact Assessment of the Regional Regulation Methods on the Investment activity]. Voprosy statistiki, 25(9), 48–62. (In Russ.)
Lapo, V. F. (2014). Konkurentsiya regionov za investitsii v proekty po osvoeniyu lesov [Regions’ Competition for Investment Projects in Forest Development]. Prostranstvennaya ekonomika [Spatial economics], 2, 75–92. (In Russ.)
Annala, C. N. (2003). Have state and local fiscal policies become more alike? Evidence of beta convergence among fiscal policy variables. Public Finance Review, 2, 144–165.
Scully, G. W. (1991). The convergence of fiscal regimes and the decline of the Tiebout effect. Public Choice, 1, 51–59.
DeJuan, J. & Tomljanovich, M. (2005). Income convergence across Canadian provinces in the 20th century: Almost but not quite there. The Annals of Regional Science, 3, 567–592.
Miller, J. & Gene, I. (2005). Alternative regional specifications and convergence of U. S. regional growth rates. The Annals of Regional Science, 2, 241–252.
Webber, D. J., White, P. & Allen, D. O. (2005). Income convergence across U. S. states: An analysis using measures of concordance and discordance. Journal of Regional Science, 3, 565–589.
Kolomak, E. A. (2009). Modeli regionalnoy politiki. Konvergentsiya i divergentsiya [Models of the Regional Policy: Convergence or Divergence]. Vestnik NGU. Sotsialno-ekonomicheskie nauki [Vestnik NSU. Series: Social and Economic Sciences], 1, 113–120. (In Russ.)
Kolomak, E. A. (2010). Prostranstvennye eksternalii kak resurs ekonomicheskogo rosta [Spatial externalities as a source of economic growth]. Region: Ekonomika i sotsiologiya [Region: Economics and Sociology], 4, 73–87. (In Russ.)
Gasparyan, O. T. (2017). Primenenie metodov prostranstvennoy ekonometriki v prikladnykh politicheskikh issledovaniyakh [Application of the methods of spatial econometrics in the applied political science]. Politicheskaya kontseptologiya. Zhurnal metadistsiplinarnykh issledovaniy [The political conceptology: journal of metadisciplinary research], 1, 41 — 48. (In Russ.)
Baicker, K. (2005). The Spillover Effects of State Spending. Journal of Public Economics, 2–3, 529–544.
Blonigen, B. A., Davies, R. B., Waddell, G. R. & Naughton, H. T. (2007). FDI in space: Spatial autoregressive relationships in foreign direct investment. European Economic Review, 5, 1303–1325.
Minakir, P. A. (2014). Ekonomicheskiy analiz i izmereniya v prostranstve [Economic Analysis and Measurements: Spatial Case]. Prostranstvennaya ekonomika [Spatial economics], 2, 12—39. (In Russ.)
Sharigin, M. D. (2010). Problemy territorialnogo upravleniya i planirovaniya. Geograficheskiy aspect [Problems of Territorial Administration and Planning (Geographical Aspect)]. Vestnik Baltiyskogo federalnogo universiteta im. I. Kanta [IKBFU’s Vestnik], 1, 15–20. (In Russ.)
Lapin, A. V. (2017). Teoretiko-metodologicheskie podkhody k probleme sotsialno-ekonomicheskoy differentsiatsii territoriy [Theoretical and methodological approaches to the problem of socio-economic differentiation of territories]. Sovremennye nauchnye issledovaniya i razrabotki [Modern scientific studies and development], 6(14), 109–124. (In Russ.)
Melnikov, R. M. (2007). Mezhregionalnoe ekonomicheskoe neravenstvo v rossiyskoy ekonomike: Tendentsii i perspektivy [Interregional economic inequality in the Russian economy: tendencies and perspectives]. Regionalnaya ekonomika: Teoriya i praktika [Regional economics: theory and practice], 8(47), 26–33. (In Russ.)
Anselin, L. (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Amsterdam: Springer, 304.
Anselin, L. (2001). Spatial Econometrics. In: B. Baltegi (Ed.), A Companion to Theoretical Econometrics (pp. 310– 330). Oxford: Blackwell.
Anselin, L. (2006). Spatial econometrics. In: Palgrave handbook of econometrics: Econometric theory. Volume 1 (pp. 961–969). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lapo, V. F. (2017). O podkhode k analizu mezhregionalnogo skhodstva mer podderzhki investitsionnoy deyatelnosti v zakonodatelstve regionov [Approach to analysis of inter-regional similarity of investment activity support measures in legislation of regions (on the example of Krasnoyarsk region)]. Statistika i ekonomika [Statistics and Economics], 3, 48–60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21686/2500–3925–2017–3–48–60. (In Russ.)
Baltagi, B. H. (2003). Econometric analysis of panel data. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 293.
Blundell R., Bond S. & Windmeijer F. (2000). Estimation in dynamic panel data models: Improving on the performance of the standard GMM estimator. Advances in Econometrics, 15, 53–91.
Blundell, R. & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87, 115–143.
Verbeek, M. (2000). A Guide to Modern Econometrics. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 616.
Greene, W. H. (1997). Econometric analysis. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 783.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Лапо В.Ф.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
