CC BY
3d ) https://dx.doi.org/10.36522/2181-9637-2022-5-8 UDC: 338.12.017(571.1)(045)
ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF ECONOMIC GROWTH IN AGRICULTURE
Abduvokhidov Akmal Abdulazizovich,
Associate Professor, ORCID: 0000-0001-8014-9435, e-mail: akash7509@rambler.ru;
Eshpulatov Dostonbek Bakhodir ugli,
Doctoral Student,
ORCID: 0000-0003-0262-627X, e-mail: eshpolatovdoston@gmail.com;
Kodyrova Dilafruz Olimovna,
Lecturer,
ORCID: 0000-0002-8556-642X, e-mail: doston95@bk.ru Gulistan State University
Introduction
In the Development Strategy of New Uzbekistan, by ensuring sustainable high growth rates in economic sectors, in the next five years, the gross domestic product per capita aimed to be increased by 1.6 times, and the per capita income by 2030 years - above 4 thousand US dollars, and the republic - to be among the "countries with an income above the average" the task of creating the ground for access has been defined. Current economic situation is characterized by a positive trend in the indicators of industrial development , an increase in the negative effects of external economic factors, the economic growth of rural areas lagging behind the development of industry, and increasing importance of social factors in the development of agriculture and the economy in general.
In the following years, the reform of our agricultural sector, in particular, improvement of the state management system in the field, wide introduction of market relations, strengthening of a legal platform for relations between entities involved in growing, processing and selling agricultural products, attracting investments in the field, introducing resource-saving technologies, and certain works are carried out to provide agricultural producers with modern equipment and technologies.
Abstract. The issue of economic growth is one of the main macroeconomic problems that have always interested economists. Another aspect of the problem is also manifested in the current macroeconomic situation. That is, nowadays we are talking not only about economic growth, but also about studying factors that determine its quality. However, no specific indicators have yet been found that allow it to be fully measured. In this regard, this article will try to analyze indicators of economic growth in the agricultural sector of our republic. As the main indicators that ensure quality of economic growth in agriculture, such indicators as material return, capital return and labor productivity have been chosen. As a result of the study, we found out that the return on material and capital in agriculture is declining, while the labor productivity index is increasing. In course of presentation of the materials, the definitions given to the concept of economic growth were refined, and statistical indicators that determine the quality of economic growth in agriculture were systematized. The findings obtained in the course of the study make it possible to identify the nature of economic growth and make comparisons with best practices. Specific conclusions and proposals were also made to ensure high-quality economic growth in agriculture in our country.
Keywords: agricultural sector, private sector, economic growth, capital return, material return, labor productivity.
КИШЛОК ХУЖАЛИГИДА ИКТИСОДИЙ УСИШ СИФАТИНИ БА^ОЛАШ
Абдуво^идов Акмал Абдулазизович,
доцент;
Эшпулатов Достонбек Бадодир угли,
таянч докторант;
Кодирова Дилафруз Олимовна,
у^итувчи
Гулистон давлат университети
Аннотация. Ицтисодий усиш ицтисодчи-ларни доимо цизицтириб келган асосий макро-ицтисодий муаммолардан биридир. Xозирги макроицтисодий вазиятда муаммонинг яна бир томони намоён булмоцда, яъни бугунги кунда масала нафацат ицтисодий усиш, балки унинг сифатини белгиловчи омилларни урганишни %ам тацозо цилади. Бироц уни тулацонли улчашга имкон берувчи аниц бир курсаткичлар %али то-пилмаган. Шу жи^атдан мазкур мацолада мамла-кат цишлоц хужалиги со^асида ицтисодий усиш курсаткичлари урганилган ва та^лил цилинган, сифатли ицтисодий усиш йуллари тадциц этил-ган ва уни белгиловчи статистик курсаткичлар ба^оланган. Цишлоц хужалигида ицтисодий усиш сифатини таъминловчи асосий курсаткичлар сифатида материал цайтими, капитал цайти-ми ва ме^нат унумдорлиги каби курсаткичлар танлаб олинди. Утказилган тадцицотлар на-тижасида цишлоц хужалигида материал ва капитал цайтими курсаткичлари пасайиб бораёт-гани, ме^нат унумдорлиги индекси усаётгани аницланди. Ицтисодий усиш тушунчасига берил-ган таърифларга аницлик киритилди, цишлоц хужалигида ицтисодий усиш сифатини белги-лаб берувчи статистик курсаткичлар тизим-лаштирилди. Тадцицот давомида олинган нати-жалар ицтисодий усиш моуиятини очиб бериш ва илгор тажрибалар билан циёслаш имконини беради. Шунингдек, мамлакатимиз цишлоц хужа-лигида сифатли ицтисодий усишни таъминлаш буйича аниц хулоса ва таклифлар билдирилди.
Калит сузлар: цишлоц хужалиги, хусусий сектор, ицтисодий усиш, капитал даромади, моддий даромад, ме^нат унумдорлиги.
ОЦЕНКА КАЧЕСТВА ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОГО РОСТА В СЕЛЬСКОМ ХОЗЯЙСТВЕ
Абдувохидов Акмал Абдулазизович,
доцент;
Эшпулатов Достонбек Баходир угли,
базовый докторант;
In the Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated October 23, 2019 "On approval of the strategy for the development of agriculture of the Republic of Uzbekistan for 2020-2030" in the priority direction of the development of rural areas: reform of the state management system in the field of development of rural areas; carry out a detailed assessment of real needs for the development of rural areas; improvement of the legal framework required for the state support and protection of rural communities and decentralization of decision-making processes; organization and development of non-agricultural enterprises, develop and pilot a transparent mechanism for attracting grant funds and investments to mobilize existing potentials of communities and develop public-private partnerships between community citizens, agrarian entrepreneurship, civil society institutions, and state bodies; tasks of development of the national program for the development of rural areas have been defined. Based on the above, improving the quality of economic growth in regions becomes the most relevant problem in current conditions. In this regard, it is deemed important to analyze the quality of economic development of regions using performance indicators which determine the main factors affecting the quality of economic growth in regions.
Materials and methods
In this research, we tried to analyze the main approaches that determine indicators and scope of qualitative economic growth in agriculture. In addition to foreign official scientific sources, open data from the official website of The State Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Statistics, the Ministry of Economic Development and Poverty Alleviation, and the Ministry of Agriculture was used to describe the research materials and justify the opinions presented.
The research has made use of empirical theoretical methods, statistical grouping, and econometric modeling methods.
In order to boost reliability of our research, MS Office Excel 2010 software and its analytical components were widely used.
Since economic growth is a complex and multifaceted process, its evaluation requires a certain system of indicators. Although physical indicators of economic growth are somewhat accurate, they are not perfect, as it is a difficult task to combine indicators of different
dimensions of goods and services into a single indicator. For this reason, economic growth rates are often calculated in comparative or constant prices [1, p. 143].
In the modern world, in the conditions of the sixth technological mode, attention to the economic growth' promotion issues is growing day by day. The Nobel prize-holder R. Solow assesses "the main task is to determine such factors of production that lead to acceleration of technical development, increase of production efficiency and intensive economic growth in general". Solow's model of growth shows that "investment in research and development can lead to the quickest economic growth". His model serves as a specific impetus for new research on the improvement of the economic growth model.
The Russian economist N.P. Kuznetsova states that, the concept of quality of economic growth is based on social reproduction, and its purpose is to strengthen the well-being of population [2, p. 144]. Another Russian expert, I.M. Tenyakov, in the context of the quality category of economic growth, highlighted such important features as connection between the quality of production factors, ensuring the quality of a final product, increasing competitiveness of economic entities and their products, and referred to the quality changes in the sector structure of social institutions and the economy [3, p. 176]. V.I. Senkov, links the quality of economic growth with processes of transition to innovative development of regions, also the formation of an investment environment, proposing methodological approaches to the assessment of economic events, creating a profile of the region in the system of regions, taking into account each criterion [4, pp. 12-18].
Unlike other researchers, B.D. Babaev and S.P. Dubrovsky evaluate the welfare criterion as the main aspect of economic growth [5, pp. 33-38]. T.I. Bukhtiyarova, M.D. Bocharova stated that "the quality of economic growth requires a new quality of change management, which, in turn, means the qualification of management personnel, optimization of management processes" [6, p. 109].
Economists in Uzbekistan say that modernization, diversification and innovation are important factors of economic growth [7, p. 38], if they point out that the serious difference in well-being among countries depends on the different levels of economic efficiency [8, p. 282], another
Кодирова Дилафруз Олимовна,
преподаватель
Гулистанский государственный университет
Аннотация. Вопрос экономического роста является одной из основных макроэкономических проблем, всегда интересовавших экономистов. Также в текущей макроэкономической ситуации проявляется еще один аспект проблемы. То есть сегодня речь идет не только об экономическом росте, но и об изучении факторов, определяющих его качество. Однако до сих пор не найдено конкретных показателей, позволяющих его в полной мере измерить. В связи с этим в данной статье мы попытаемся изучить и проанализировать показатели экономического роста в сельском хозяйстве страны. В качестве основных показателей, обеспечивающих качество экономического роста в сельском хозяйстве, были выбраны такие показатели, как материальная отдача, капиталоотдача и производительность труда. В результате проведенного исследования мы выяснили, что показатели материальная отдача и отдача капитала в сельском хозяйстве снижаются, а индекс производительности труда увеличивается. В ходе изложения материалов были уточнены определения, данные понятию экономического роста, систематизированы статистические показатели, определяющие качество экономического роста в сельском хозяйстве. Результаты, полученные в ходе исследования, позволяют выявить характер экономического роста и провести сравнение с лучшими практиками. Также были сделаны конкретные выводы и предложения по обеспечению качественного экономического роста в сельском хозяйстве нашей страны.
Ключевые слова: сельское хозяйство, частный сектор, экономический рост, капитальный доход, материальный доход, производительность труда.
prominent specialist in the field, U. Madrakhimov, while focusing on the issue of increasing economic growth on the basis of technical development and innovative activity, emphasizes that special attention should be paid to the issue of its orientation from the social aspect [9, p. 94].
Structural elements of organizational and economic mechanisms of economic growth in agriculture, according to their object and scale (for the food market, agricultural production,
investment activities, state regulation, growth stability, strategy implementation, etc.) in the works of scientists in the field of agriculture invited: N.A.Borkhunov [10, p. 93], E.F. Zavorotin [11, p. 300], A.N. Semin [12, p. 5], V.Z. Mazloev [l3, p. 15], E.P. Chirkov [14, p. 350], A.I. Altuhov [15, p. 347] and others.
Research findings
In the theory of economics, there are two directions defining the concept of "quality of economic growth". The first direction connects the quality of economic growth with its intensification, that is, the structure and dynamics of production related to specific characteristics and target direction of an extended reproduction process, featured by the type of economic growth, the quality change of products, the level of development of production, correspond to constantly growing social needs.
The second direction links the concept of "quality of economic growth" with strengthening of its social direction, in which the main components are improving financial well-being of people, upgrading the development of social infrastructure networks, investments in human capital, ensuring working conditions and safety of people's lives, the unemployed and social security for the disabled [16].
In our opinion, the concept of "Quality of economic growth" should be considered together with a social aspect of economic development. This is the quality of growth that meets the requirements of economy and ongoing development, which implies the use of new technologies aimed at meeting various needs of people and further improving their well-being, as well as ensuring its high competitiveness.
The main indicators reflecting transformation of the results of economic growth into qualitative changes in the economy are material return, capital return and labor productivity, as their growth ensures structural changes in the economy and, ultimately, improvement of the well-being of population .
The above-mentioned indicators describe the volume of gross regional product made for each unit of material, capital, financial and labor resources. Evaluation of these indicators plays an important role in the analysis of the quality of economic growth at all levels of economic policy, from micro to macroeconomic level.
The analysis of the economic development trends of the regions showed that in 2000-
2021, sustainable economic growth rates were observed in all regions of the Republic of Uzbekistan. At the same time, economic growth in regions has a different description depending on the current structure and specific characteristics of regions, which is confirmed by strengthening of interregional stratification in the maximum and minimum values of GNI per capita. In addition, the disproportionality of growth rates in the regions of Uzbekistan is confirmed by existing structural changes in the network structures of the regional economy.
One of the main indicators of efficiency of the economic growth, which shows qualitative changes in the economy of the regions, is the indicator of material return in the production process. Material return in the production process is determined using the following formula at comparative prices [17, pp. 11-15]:
M[= ^ , (1)
ni
Here:
Mr - Material return of i-sector in
i
r-region,soum/soum;
GOf - gross income of the i-sector,in the r-region;
IIf - Material costs (intermediate consumer goods) in the r-region of the i sector in the production process.
The material return indicator shows, how many soums of material resources spent on production bring gross output. The change of the material return indicator in the agricultural sector of the economy of the Republic of Uzbekistan for the analyzed years 2015-2021 is mainly negative (Figure 1).
In the last 6 years, the material return in Uzbekistan's agriculture has largely decreased. In 2015, the rate of return on material was equal to 2.85, By 2021, this indicator has decreased to 2.54. Between 2015 and 2019, the indicator decreased regularly. Growth has been observed only since 2020. It is noteworthy that the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a decline in other sectors, but it has caused positive changes in agriculture.
The material return in Uzbekistan's agriculture decreased by 11 percentage points compared to the value of the indicator in 2015, or the material costs spent on the production of 1 soum of agricultural products in 2021 compared to 2015 increased by 12.4 percentage points.
Figure 1. Indicator of material return in agriculture in Uzbekistan*.
* Own composition using SCRUS [18].
When the indicators are trended, we can observe the growth trend as we can see. Also, the trend has the form of a quadratic polynomial function:
y = 0.0175x2 - 0.1978x + 3.0699
with a confidence level of R2 = 0.9121, that is, a parabola.
In the real sector of the economy of the regions where the indicators of material return have increased, it can be said that the investment resources aimed at the modernization and development of these industries are being used effectively. Nonetheles, we can see from the rendered calculations the investments aimed at the development of the economy of these regions were not used effectively enough for the areas where positive results were not achieved.
The efficiency of using investment resources directed to the main capital of the region's economy is considered through the capital return indicator. Return on capital describes the amount of additional product produced per unit of investment.
The return on capital indicator is determined at comparative price s us ing the following formula as an indicator of material return [19, p. 11]:
Here:
K[ - capital return of i-sector in r-region;
GRPf - gross income of the i-sector,in the r-region;
Ir - the volume of investments in the
i
i-sector,in the r-region.
As it can be seen from the analysis of capital return in the economy of Uzbekistan (Figure 2), the most investments were attracted in 2020, between 2015 and 2020. By 2020, the volume of attracted investments has increased by 3.2 times compared to 2015. However, it should be noted that the rate of return on capital has been steadily decreasing during these periods: By 2020, the change in return on capital was 0.76 times compared to the level of this indicator achieved in 2015.
The highest rate of effective use of investments in agriculture was achieved in 2017. At the end of 2020, the return on capital decreased by 23.2 % percentage points compared to the level of this indicator in 2015. According to the analysis, the implemented investment policy is ineffective, that is, relatively low rates of GNP growth were achieved for one soum of investment in the economy.
In general, evaluating the changes in the level of capital profitability and the growth of investments in the economy of the regions in 2015-2020, we can conclude that the economy of almost all regions of Uzbekistan is capital intensive.
Figure 2. Indicator of capital return in agriculture in Uzbekistan*
* Own composition using SCRUS [18].
Another important indicator of production efficiency is labor productivity. Labor productivity describes labo r efficiency. At the macro level, it is measured by the volume of output produced by an employee during a certain period of time.
The labor productivity index is determined using the followin g formula [20]:
Here:
Lf - labor productivity of the i-sector r-region" ;
GRPr - Gross revenue of the i-sector,in the
i
r-region;"
Lf - the number of people employed in the i-network in the r-region";
The analysis of changes in labor productivity in the regions of Uzbekistan shows that there was an increase in labor productivity in 2010-2021 (Figure 3).
The best progress on this indicator was
achieved in the next 5 years, this indicator increased 2.7 times compared to 2016, and compared to 2010 it increased 8.7 times. This indicator had increased by 22 % on average in 2010-2021. During the period 2010-2021, the lowest rate of growth was observed in 2013 (14 %), and the highest in 2011 (42 %) and 2018 (31 %).
The growth of labor productivity in the sector is related to the development of industries with high added value and a high share of investments in capital-intensive sectors. Current situation, in turn, explains a decent level of investments in modern technologies and growing skills of those employed in these areas.
The state-of-art achieved in such regions as Tashkent, the Republic of Karakalpakstan and the city of Jizzakh, where labor productivity indicators are significantly higher than in other regions of Uzbekistan, is explained by introduction of powerful manufactiring facilities using modern technologies in these regions in recent years.
Figure 3. Indicator of labor productivity in agriculture in Uzbekistan*
* Own composition using SCRUS [18].
Although the growth of labor productivity in the agricultural sector of Uzbekistan in 20102021 shows positive trends, it is significantly lower than the growth of GNI and the volume of investments made in the economy of these regions during this period. The low rate of growth of labor productivity in the regions of Uzbekistan is a result of high level of obsolescence of the main production funds and technologies, high costs of using labor-intensive manufactures.
Comparative assessment of the current growth of average salaries in regions in 20102021 (Figure 4) shows that the growth of salaries is significantly higher than the growth of labor productivity in the regions.
Over the following five years, a large-scale reform program in Uzbekistan affected almost all areas of the economy, society and public sector. Although transformation of Uzbekistan is still in its early stage, following results show encouraging results in the country's agricultural development.
1. Ensuring greater and more sustainable economic growth at the expense of sectors that were not paid attention to under the old model. Although the average rate of economic growth in Uzbekistan during the period before the COVID-19 pandemic was slightly lower than the one before 2017, economic sectors that were neglected in the previous economic model had a positive effect on the growth indicators.
Figure 4. Nominal average salary in agriculture, forestry and fisheries of Uzbekistan, soums*
* Own composition using SCRUS [18].
As a result of the reforms aimed at liberalizing fruit and vegetable production and expanding exports, the agricultural sector began to recover, owing to what in 2020 agriculture accounted for about a third of GDP and a quarter of employment in this sector. In 2019, exports of fruits and vegetables reached its highest point of over 1.1 billion US dollars. Although the value of exports decreased in 2020 due to pandemic, the economic growth rate of the republic was at 1.6 % thanks to continuous growth of agriculture.
2. Restore productivity growth and create jobs in the manufacturing industry. Uzbekistan's many labor-intensive manufacturing sectors, such as food and beverage industries, as well as textile, clothing and leather industries, demonstrate current competitive advantage of our republic in the international trade. 3. Positive influence of the private sector. In the private sector, reforms to liberalize prices,
(domestic and foreign) trade and business conditions have contributed to a sharp increase in registrations of new enterprises (Figure 5), including in such sectors as a wholesale trade, the development of which had been previously hampered by complex licensing requirements.
An overhaul of the tax system to remove barriers to firm size and employment, as well as a shift from a turnover tax to a profit tax, also contributed to record growth in new businesses and taxpayer registrations. Both - new firms- and taxpayers' registrations hit record highs in 2021 and are shown to grow strongly over the past 5 years. Although the progress in reforming SOEs has been gradual, there are more opportunities for the private sector due to shrinking of the state production. About 600 small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises were sold or liquidated through auctions as a result of systematic measures taken in 2019.
08.00.00 - ИКТИСОДИЕТ ФАНЛАРИ 08.00.00 - ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ 08.00.00 - ECONOMIC SCIENCES
Figure 5. The number of newly established enterprises and organizations in agriculture,
in thousands*
* Own composition using SCRUS [18].
Looking ahead of the next five years, the government has set itself a goal of halving poverty by 2030 and bringing Uzbekistan to the rank of upper-middle-income countries. It should be noted that this is an ambitious plan that requires an increase in real national income per capita by 9-10 % per year.
Over the past two decades, the benefits of economic growth in Uzbekistan have been underutilized. Slow growth of employment and wages remains an urgent problem of economic development. Since 2010, two-thirds of economic growth has come from increasing fixed capital and exporting such natural resources as gold and gas. Although the output per employee has increased by 50 % over this period, almost all of this raise was accounted for by mining and industry. For more than two decades, productivity growth in the sectors of agriculture and services, where the bulk of the workforce is employed, has slowed significantly down compared to other countries in Europe and Central Asia. In 2017, the labor force's share of national income was only 41 %, well below the regional average of 55 %, and is likely to decline further. The effectiveness of job creation remains negligible, with only 6 % of per capita GDP growth between 2010 and 2019 attributable to job creation. We can see that between 2010 and 2018, a 1 % increase in employment required a 5 % increase in GDP, which in turn is almost twice the average of developing countries. Annual job creation in 2018 was 200,000 less than the labor force growth, and the official unemployment rate in 2020 was 10.5 %, up 1.5 % from 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic. Addressing these challenges through a more inclusive growth model is critical for achieving the development goals of the republic.
Therefore, as Uzbekistan aims to become one of the countries with incomes higher than average by 2030, the growth of real GDP per capita should be on average 10 % per year. Halving poverty over the next five years will require faster job creation and economic empowerment, especially for youths, women and the disabled. But the pace of job creation depends, to large extent, on redistribution of resources in order to make a more efficient and sustainable use of them. This, in turn, envisages limiting the state's intervention into the economy and rapid development of the private sector. Moreover, the government needs to consistently invest in human capital, a strong social protection system and a green growth model. In this regard, the World Bank recommends accelerating reforms in the following directions: support of the role of the private sector in market changes, market development , investing in human capital, and strengthening the role and importance of the state in ensuring a sustainable future and prosperity.
In Uzbekistan, the spheres of comparative advantage are dominated by state-owned enterprises protected from private sector competition. Inadequate regulatory and legal framework hinders the search for new growth opportunities and their implementation. Until recently, the private sector had significantly limited access to the necessary factors of production, including land, labor, and capital. The state invests disproportionately in job-creating, fast-growing, but under-performing state-owned enterprises, while underutilizing land and labor resources. All this has dire consequences for the private sector. Among countries with similar indicators in terms of regions and income groups, the level of establishing new firms in
Uzbekistan is the lowest; high unemployment rate; private firms are often unable to expand. Removing these barriers to growth requires significantly reducing the number of state-owned enterprises, improving the governance of state-owned enterprises, and reducing the impact of state-owned enterprises on market competition. This requires addressing the infrastructure gaps that result from government investments that do not meet the needs of products, businesses, and people in the market. Priority areas such as transition to "green" technologies aimed at stimulating growth at the expense of the private sector instead of the state-led model, as well as rapid growth of productivity in agriculture are promising.
The role of the state in the agricultural system was one of the main reasons why Uzbekistan had missed the opportunities to implement structural changes. Uzbekistan's agricultural sector has great potential for improved practices, more efficient use of resources such as fertilizers and water, as well as increased value and productivity through rational land allocation. Horticulture is highly productive and has great job creation potential, accounting for 50 % of the value of crop production and 40 % of gross agricultural output, even though it covers only 10 % of arable land. The state agricultural system, based on the dominance of cotton and grain, is being reorganized, with a positive focus on private ownership of land use and support for horticulture. By removing remaining constraints, sustainable development will improve allocation of resources in the economy and ultimately create more and better jobs.
Conclusions
Following conclusions can be drawn from the analysis of qualitative changes in the economic development of the regions in 2010-2021:
Material returns in agriculture had decreased significantly by 2021 compared to 2010, which
indicates high material costs in production. The main reasons for this are high obsolescence of basic production funds and technologies;
High level of investment in agriculture is accompanied by a low level of capital investment, which indicates to low efficiency of the use of investment resources directed to the sector's economy and shortcomings in its organization and modernization of the sector.
The rise in labor productivity in agriculture is a result of increased skills of those employed in the sector.
Taking into account the trends of economic development in the regions of Uzbekistan, paying special attention to the quality of economic growth and increasing the welfare of the population, in order to achieve sustainable high growth rates of GDP and effective structural changes in the economy, it is found appropriate to take the following measures:
to clarify the importance category and the need for accelerated modernization, developing the sector modernization program, paying special attention to introduction of highperformance modern technologies through a deep analysis of the state-of-art of the main production funds at the level of economic sectors, regions, districts;
based on the modernization programs being developed, to introduce mechanisms for an effective use of investment funds, to monitor implementation of each project with an emphasis on increasing efficiency indicators and capital return, and appoint a specific responsible office;
to improve skills of economically active people with wide introduction of targeted seminars and trainings at the level of local authorities;
to activate work on application of modern technologies and improvement of personnel skills between educational institutions and manufactures and organizations.
REFERENCES
1. Abduvakhidov A., Eshpulatov D. at. al. Qishloq xo'jaligida iqtisodiy o'sish sifatini aniqlash va uning ko'rsatkichlarini tahlil qilish [Determination of the quality of economic growth in agriculture and analysis of its indicators]. Logistics and Economy, 2022, no. 3, p. 143.
2. Kuznetsova N.P. Ekonomicheskiy rost: istoriya i sovremennost' [Economic growth: history and modernity]. St. Petersburg, September Publishing House, 2001, p. 144.
3. Tenyakov I.M. Sovremennyy ekonomicheskiy rost: istochniki, faktory, kachestvo [Modern economic growth: sources, factors, quality]. Moscow, Prospect, 2015, p. 176.
4. Sen'kov V.I., Sen'kova N.V. Kachestvo ekonomicheskogo rosta regionov: teoreticheskiye aspekty, kriterii otsenki i metodologiya analiza [The quality of regional economic growth: theoretical aspects, evaluation criteria
and analysis methodology]. Regional Economics: Theory and Practice, 2010, no. 32, pp. 12-18.
5. Babaev B.D., Dubrovskiy S.P. Ekonomicheskiy rost: rasshirennaya traktovka. kachestvo ekonomicheskogo rosta [Economic growth: an extended interpretation. quality of economic growth]. Economics of Education, 2015, no. 1, pp. 33-38.
6. Bocharova M.D., Buhtijarova T.I. Ekonomicheskiy rost: problemy i puti resheniya v sisteme malogo predprinimatel'stva [Economic growth: problems and solutions in the system of small business]. Problems of socio-economic development of the new economic conditions: the view of young researchers. Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference IV of the Ural Opening Day of Science and Business. Ed. E.P. Velikhov. Chelyabinsk, Entsiklopediya, 2017, pp. 109-114.
7. Pardayev M.Q., Mamasoatov T.X. Modernizatsiya, diversifikatsiya va innovatsiyalar iqtisodiy o'sishning muhim omillari hisoblanadi [Modernization, diversification and innovation are important factors of economic growth]. Tashkent, Navruz, 2014, p. 38.
8. Ulmasov A., Vakhobov A.V. Iqtisodiy nazariya [Theory of economics]. Tashkent, Economy-Finance, 2014, p. 282.
9. Madrahimov U. Barqaror o'sish sifati va mehnat unumdorligi nisbati asoslari [Basics of sustainable growth quality and labor productivity ratio]. The main directions of further modernization and improvement of the competitiveness of the national economy. Proceedings of the VII Forum of Economists. Tashkent, IPMI, 2015, p. 94.
10. Borkhunov N.A., Sagazhdak Ye.A., Maslova V.V., Nazarenko A.V., Schastlivtseva L.V. et al. Organizacionno-jekonomicheskij mehanizm obespechenija ustojchivogo jekonomicheskogo rosta v sfere agropromyshlennogo proizvodstva v Rossii [Organizational and economic mechanism for ensuring sustainable economic growth in the field of agro-industrial production in Russia]. Moscow, VNIIESh, 2006, p. 93.
11. Zavorotin E.F., Afanas'ev V.I., Gordopolova A.A., Tjurina N.S., Nesmyslenov A.P. et al. Organizatsionno-ekonomicheskiy mekhanizm ustoychivogo razvitiya agropromyshlennogo kompleksa i sel'skikh territoriy v Povolzh'ye [Organizational and economic mechanism of sustainable development of the agro-industrial complex and rural areas in the Volga region]. Saratov, Saratov source, 2017, p. 300.
12. Syomin A.N. Nauchnye osnovy formirovaniya ekonomicheskih mekhanizmov: formy, tipy, vidy [Scientific foundations for the formation of economic mechanisms: forms, types, looks]. Agri-food Policy of Russia, 2012, no. 5, pp. 5-12.
13. Mazloev V.Z., Ozerova M.G. Formirovaniye protsessov transformatsii ekonomicheskogo mekhanizma agrarnogo sektora [Formation of the processes of transformation of the economic mechanism of the agricultural sector]. Agricultural Economics of Russia, 2017, no. 8, pp. 15-21.
14. Chirkov E.P., Laretin N.A., Nesterenko L.N., Vaskin V.F., Kamovskiy N.P. et al. Razvitiye organizatsionno-ekonomicheskogo mekhanizma v sisteme vedeniya agropromyshlennogo proizvodstva regiona [Development of an organizational and economic mechanism in the system of conducting agro-industrial production in the region]. Ed. E.P. Chirkov. Bryansk, Bryansk State Agrarian University, 2014, p. 350.
15. Altukhov A.I., Paptsov A.G., Shutkov A.A. et al. Osnovnyye napravleniya razmeshheniya i spetsializatsii sel'skogo hozyaystva Rossii [The main directions of placement and specialization of Russian agriculture]. Moscow, Sam poligrafist, 2020, p. 347.
16. Asadov H. Kachestvo ekonomicheskogo rosta [Qualities of economic growth]. Economic Review, 2020, vol. 3 (243), p. 142.
17. Akulich V.V. Ekonomicheskiy analiz material'nykh zatrat [Economic analysis of material costs]. Planning and Economic Department, 2013, no. 8, pp. 11-15.
18. SCRUS. The official site of The State Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Statistics. Available at: https://stat.uz/en/ (accessed 06.06.2022).
19. Gorbatkova G.A., Malashenko V.M. Otsenka predel'nykh effektov kapitalootdachi s pomoshh'yu determinirovannykh lineynykh modeley [Estimating marginal effects of capital returns using deterministic linear models]. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice, 2012, no. 24. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/otsenka-predelnyh-effektov-kapitalootdachi-s-pomoschyu-determinirovannyh-lineynyh-modeley/(accessed 14.07.2022).
20. Vozhkina E.A. Proizvoditel'nost' truda v Rossii i za rubezhom: sravnitel'nyy analiz i perspektivy rosta [Labor productivity in Russia and abroad: comparative analysis and growth prospects]. EVR, 2018, vol. 4 (58). Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/proizvoditelnost-truda-v-rossii-i-za-rubezhom-sravnitelnyy-analiz-i-perspektivy-rosta/ (accessed 14.07.2022).
21. Hajnish J., Paukke X., Nagel G.D., Hashsi D. Agrokhimikaty v okruzhayushhey srede [Agrochemicals in the environment]. Transl. from German and foreword by N.G. Rakipopa. Moscow, Kolos, 1979, p. 357.
Reviewer:
Olimova N., Doctor of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor, Fergana State University.
