Industrial Policy Priorities of Russia in the Context of Challenges of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Part 1
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17059/2018-2-7Keywords:
industrial policy, image of good economy, technological innovations, Industry 4.0, Fourth Industrial Revolution, priorities, digital economy, regional aspect of information and communication technologies, the Middle Urals, new business modelsAbstract
We article proves that the industrial policy is not only an element coordinating the various types of state policies. It is as well a platform, on which the economic policy of the state is built. I systematize five directions representing the traditional approach to understanding the industrial policy and three new directions of its understanding. I emphasize that a new purpose of the industrial policy as the achievement of «an image» of a “good economy”, and that the «standard projects» of regional industrial policy are unacceptable. I define new characteristics of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Its fundamental features are harmonization and integration of a large amount of research disciplines. ms, in turn, imposes high requirements to developing priorities for both the federal and regional industrial policy. Another feature of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is the emergence of the digital economy. I analyse its development in Russia as compared with the developed countries. Moreover, I systemize the studies about the readiness of Russian companies for the digital economy. Пє information and communication technologies are the most important factor for the digital economy. We analysis of these technologies development in regions showed high level of its differentiation of regional indicators (from 1.5 to more than 300 times). We assessment of the development of information and communication technologies allow categorise the Middle Urals as a leading region almost for all indicators in this area not only in the Ural Federal District, but also in Russia, in general. We importance of new business models as most essential innovations during the Fourth Industrial Revolution has increased. Wis defines new agents and objects of industrial policy. We results of the research may be used to correct the regional strategy of socio-economic development as well as laws on industrial policy.References
Kuznetsov, B. V. & Simachev, Yu. V. (2014). Evolyutsiya gosudarstvennoy promyshlennoy politiki v Rossii [Evolution of State Industrial Policy in Russia]. Zhurnal Novoy ekonomicheskoy assotsiatsii [Journal of the New Economic Association], 2(22), 152–179. (In Russ.)
Tatarkin, A. I. & Romanova, O. A. (2007). Promyshlennaya politika i mekhanizm ee realizatsii: sistemnyy podkhod [The industrial policy and the mechanism of its realization: the system approach]. Ekonomika regiona [Economy of Region], 3, 19–31. (In Russ.)
Polterovich, V. M. & Popov, V. V. (2006). Evolyutsionnaya teoriya ekonomicheskoy politiki [Evolutionary theory of economic policy]. Voprosy ekonomiki [Problems of Economic Transition], 7, 4–23. (In Russ.)
Beath, J. (2002). UK Industrial Policy: Old Tunes on New Instruments? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(2), 221−239.
Federico, G. & Foreman-Peck, J. (1999). European Industrial Policy: Introduction. In: Foreman-Peck J., Federico G. (Eds). European industrial policy: The twentieth-century experience. N. Y.: Oxford University Press, 484; 1−17.
Perechneva, I. (2017). Na strategicheskoye chudo upovaem [We hope for a strategic miracle]. Ekspert-Ural [Expert-Ural], 50(752), 8–12. (In Russ.)
Dementyev, V. E. (2013). Strukturnyye faktory tekhnologicheskogo razvitiya [Structural Factors of Technological Development]. Ekonomika i matematicheskie metody [Economics and Mathematical Methods], 49(4), 33–46. (In Russ.)
Rodrik, D. (2004). Industrial Policy for the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University, 57.
Warwick, K. (2013). Beyond Industrial Policy: Emerging Issues and New Trends. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers No. 2. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k4869clw0xp-en/ (date of access: 23.03.2018 g.).
Lin, J. (2011). New Structural Economics: A Framework for Rethinking Development. World Bank Research Observer, 26(2), 193−221.
Cutter, B., Litan, R. & Stangler, D. (2016). The Good Economy. Kansas City: Roosevelt Institute and Kauffman Foundation, 64.
Phelps, E. S. (2007). The Economic Performance of Nations: Prosperity Depends on Dynamism, Dynamism on Institutions. In: Sheshinski E., Strom R. J., Baumol W. J. (Eds). Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and the Growth Mechanism of Free Enterprise Economies. Princeton : Princeton University Press, 400; 342−356.
Phelps, E. S. (2009). The Good Life and the Good Economy: the Humanist Perspective of Aristotle, the Pragmatists and the Vitalists, and the Economic Justice of John Rawls. In: Kanbur R., Basu K. (Eds). Arguments for a better world: essays in honor of Amartya Sen. Vol. I: Ethics, welfare, and measurement. Oxford — N. Y.: Oxford University Press, 640; 35–49.
Tambovtsev, V. L. (2017). Promyshlennaya politika. K novomu ponimaniyu [Industrial Policy: Towards New Interpretation]. Izvestiya UrGEU [Journal of the Ural State University of Economics], 5(73), 54–67. (In Russ.)
Lenchuk, E. B. (2016). Novaya promyshlennaya politika Rossii v kontekste obespecheniya tekhnologicheskoy nezavisimosti [New industrial policy of Russia in the context of ensuring technological independence]. St. Petersburg: Aleteyya Publ., 336. (In Russ.)
Rodrik, D. (2017). Ekonomika reshaet. Sila i slabost “mrachnoy nauki”: per. s angl. [Economics Rules: The Rights and Wrongs of the Dismal Science: Trans. from English]. Moscow: Institute Gaydar Publ., 256. (In Russ.)
Putna, M. (2012). New Industrial Policy. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 1(2), 463–467.
Taleb, N. N. (2015). Chernyy lebed. Pod znakom nepredskazuemosti [The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable]. Moscow: KoLibri Publ., Azbuka-Attikus Publ., 736. (In Russ.)
Shvab, K. (2016). Chetvertaya promyshlennaya revolyutsiya [The Fourth Industrial Revolution]. Moscow: Eksmo Publ., 208. (In Russ.)
Solovyeva, Yu. N. & Feygin, G. F. (2016). Razvitie informatsionnykh i kommunikatsionnykh tekhnologiy kak indikator globalizatsii: mirovye tendentsii i rossiyskaya spetsifika [Development of information and communication technologies as an indicator of the globalization: world trends and russian specifics]. Izvestiya Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta [Izvestiâ Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo èkonomičeskogo universiteta], 2(98), 17–30. (In Russ.)
Informatsionnoe obshchestvo. Tendentsii razvitiya v subektakh Rossiyskoy Federatsii. Vyp. 2. Stat. sb. [Information society. Development tendencies in the subjects of the Russian Federation. Issue 2. Collection of articles]. (2015). Nats. issled. un-t. “Vysshaya shkola ekonomiki” [Higher School of Economics National Research University]. Moscow: HSE Publ., 160. (In Russ.)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Olga Aleksandrovna Romanova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
