CC BY
7Conclusions. Therefore, the study substantiates the directions of stakeholder management at construction enterprises, considering the experience of foreign corporations. The essential characteristics and features of the functioning of the models of interaction between interested parties were determined that made it possible to propose the use of a partner model at construction enterprises that takes into account the interests and characteristics of the relationship between stakeholders. Based on the study, a monitoring system for managerial decisions and relationships between interested parties, in which the department of information and analytical support is especially important, which ensures the formation and use of data flows by stakeholder groups has been developed. In addition, a Coordination Council was proposed as a decision-making body that is advisory and takes into account the interests of all stakeholder groups. As part of the stakeholder strategy, an organizational and economic mechanism for managing stakeholders in construction companies has been developed. This allows making managerial decisions taking into account the interests of all groups of stakeholders, ensure appropriate monitoring of these decisions at all stages, create a system of information protection, and create a favorable information environment. The proposed organizational and economic management mechanism creates opportunities for the diagnosis of management decisions and the prevention of negative phenomena in the relationships between groups of stakeholders. The developed areas for introducing this mechanism into the activities of construction companies, which are systemic and take into account the specifics of the functioning of enterprise units with the transformation of existing structural units or the creation of new organizational units, are particular importance. A corporate and economic management mechanism, which allows the creation and adoption of managerial decisions considering the interests of groups of stakeholders with which construction companies interact has been developed. Besides, the proposed system of information protection and processing of information flows allows controlling the process of making managerial decisions, their implementation in the
activities of organizational units. The corporate and economic management mechanism provides feedback between levels of management decision making. The possibility of preventing the impact of negative phenomena in the context of interaction of construction companies with stakeholders should be pointed out.
References
1. State Statistics Service of Ukraine. Retrieved from: http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua.
2. Zub A.T. (2002). Strategic Management -Theory and Practice. Retrieved from: http://uchebnik-online.com/soderzhanie/textbook_77.html
3. Clarkson M.E. (1995). A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92 - 118.
4. Cleland, D.I. (1998). Stakeholder Management in Jeffrey K. Pinto, (ed.), Project Management Handbook, Jossey-Bass Publishers.
5. Mamonov K.A. (2011). The organizational-economic mechanism of management stakeholders the building companies: essence, structure and information protection. Komunalne hospodarstvo mist: Naukovo-tekhnichnyy zbirnyk. Vol. 100. Series: Economics, 227-234.
6. Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R., Wood, D.J. (1997). Toward a Theory. Academy of Stakeholder Identification and Salience, 24(4), 853-886.
7. Savage, G.T., Nix, W., Whitehead, C.J., Blair J.D. (1991). Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive, 5(2), 61-75.
8. Selander, Y. (2009). Stakeholder Management: management of interest groups. Retrieved from: http://www.hrm.ru/stejjkkholder-menedzhment-uprav-lenie-zainteresovannymi-gruppami
9. Parmar B.L., Freeman, R.E., Harrison, J.S. Wicks, A.C., Purnell, L., de Colle S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 403-445. DOI: 10.1080/19416520.2010.495581
ПРОБЛЕМЫ ЭКВИВАЛЕНТНОСТИ МЕЖОТРАСЛЕВОГО ОБМЕНА В АПК УКРАИНЫ
Феняк Л.А.
ассистент кафедры экономики, Винницкий национальный аграрный университет
Винница, Украина
PROBLEMS OF EQUIVALENCE OF INTER-INDUSTRY EXCHANGE IN AGRICULTURAL
INDUSTRY OF UKRAINE
Feniak L.
Assistant of the Department Economics Vinnytsia National Agrarian University
Аннотация
Наблюдаемый на сегодняшний день значительный рост цен на промышленные товары в совокупности с неблагоприятными прогнозами дальнейшего роста цен увеличивает вероятность возникновения диспа-
ритета в межотраслевом обмене между сельскохозяйственными организациями и производителями материально-технических ресурсов, что делает вновь актуальным вопрос об эквивалентности межотраслевого обмена в АПК.
В статье рассматриваются понятия паритета и диспаритета цен. Дана оценка состояния ценовых отношений при межотраслевых обменах, которые сложились не в пользу сельского хозяйства, вызвали отток капитала и деформировали воспроизводственный процесс в агропромышленном комплексе Украины.
Акцентировано внимание на важности соблюдения соотношения цен на сельскохозяйственную продукцию и продукцию промышленности, которая потребляется в процессе производства сельскохозяйственными товаропроизводителями. Определены последствия нарушения эквивалентности межотраслевого обмена. Проанализированы соотношения уровней цен на продукцию сельского хозяйства и промышленную продукцию в Украине, их динамика.
Для оценки уровня эквивалентности межотраслевого обмена (паритета) проведено анализ индексов цен на продукцию, реализуемую сельскохозяйственными организациями, и цен на приобретаемые данными организациями материально-технические, энергетические ресурсы. Важным показателем является отношение, показывающее, сколько необходимо продать тонн того или вида сельскохозяйственной продукции, чтобы приобрести тонну (единицу) материально-технических ресурсов.
Определены основные причины диспаритета, а также возможные пути его преодоления.
Abstract
Today, there is a significant increase in prices for industrial goods along with unfavorable prognosis of further price increases. All this increases the likelihood of inter-sectoral disparity in the exchange between agricultural organizations and producers of material and technical resources, so the issue of the equivalence of interbranch exchange in the agricultural sector is relevant.
The article deals with the concept of parity and price disparity. An assessment is made of the state of price relations in interindustry exchanges, which were not in favor of agriculture, caused an outflow of capital and distorted the reproductive process in the agro-industrial complex of Ukraine.
The emphasis is placed on the importance of keeping the ratio of prices for agricultural products and industrial products consumed in the process of production by agricultural producers. The consequences of violation of the equivalence of intersectional exchange are determined. The correlation of the prices of agricultural products and industrial products in Ukraine, their dynamics is analyzed.
To assess the level of equivalence of interindustry exchange (parity), an analysis of price indices for products sold by agricultural organizations and prices for material, technical and energy resources acquired by these organizations was made. An important indicator is the ratio, showing how much it is necessary to sell tons of a particular type of agricultural product in order to acquire a ton (unit) of material and technical resources.
The main causes of disparity are identified, as well as possible ways of overcoming it.
Ключевые слова: эквивалентность межотраслевого обмена, ценовой паритет, диспаритет, индексы цен, сельскохозяйственное производство, издержки производства, материально-технические ресурсы, покупательная способность.
Keywords: interbranch exchange equivalence, price parity, disparity, price indices, agricultural production, production costs, material and technical resources, purchasing power.
Among a number of problems that hinder the development and further reform of the agricultural sector of Ukraine, the price disparity occupies an important place. This means that the ratio of prices for various goods and services and the cost of socially necessary labor for its production is violated. This discrepancy is especially evident in the "scissors" of prices for agricultural products and industrial products. The price disparity on the main types of agricultural products has a significant impact on reducing profits and reducing the level of profitability of agricultural enterprises.
A number of prominent economists in Ukraine and abroad, such as: Lukinov I., Oliynyk O., Paskhaver B., Sabluk P., Sagaidak E., Shpychak O., Venzher V. dealt with the problems of equivalence of intersectoral exchange and the study of the consequences of violation of the ratio of prices for agricultural and industrial products. The discrepancy of prices in the branches of the national economy and possible ways to overcome it are covered in the works of Avdeev M.,, Bodnar O., Si-renko N., etc. The issues of parity of exchange between the branches of agriculture and industry are still relevant today and need further research.
Agro-industrial production is a complex organizational and economic structure, where enterprises and organizations of various industries are involved in a single technological process, engaged in the production and promotion of the final agricultural product to the consumer. The deep division of labor, the technological isolation of the individual stages of production and their assignment to independent economic entities determine the functioning of inter-industry and inter-farm exchange, a characteristic feature of which is the establishment of long-term relations between its participants on the basis of economic partnership.
V. Venzher was the founder of the theory of the exchange of activities between industry and agriculture, believing that the main thing is to prepare the conditions for a harmonious combination of industry and agriculture. In modern conditions, this preparation is provided by coordinating the economic interests of partners in the production of the final product of the agricultural sector, which we consider as the beginning of a hierarchical streamlining of economic relations.
E. Sagaidak interprets the concept of parity much more broadly: "The content of this concept (inter-industry exchange equivalence) is the exchange of an equal amount of social labor embodied in the use value of products produced in different industries. Such conditions of commodity exchange are achieved by setting prices in accordance with the requirements of the law of value. Under the conditions of a market economy, this process, under the influence of intersectoral competition, is modified on the basis of profit distribution in proportion to the invested capital, and the price of production becomes the basis for the exchange instead of the cost of the goods". [4]
Price parity should be understood as the ratio between prices for agricultural products and industrial products and services used in agriculture, in which the purchasing power of prices for agricultural products in relation to industrial products and services will remain at the level of the base period. The point is that the agricultural producer for the proceeds from the sale of its own products had the opportunity not only to reproduce the resources used in the production process, but also to carry out expanded reproduction at the level of the base period.
Economists insist that ensuring parity is the basis for the stability of agricultural development, improving living standards and increasing foreign economic activity. The concept of parity was first introduced in the Agricultural Regulation Act of 1933 in the United States. It used the concept of "parity farm price", which was used to determine the purchasing power of farm products in any month compared to the base period. Thus, the criterion for assessing the parity ratio is the ability of agricultural producers to purchase the same number of means of production, services and consumer goods as in the base year. The law of the French Republic of August 5, 1960 №60-808 "On Agrarian Policy" as one of the objectives was to establish parity between agriculture and other sectors of the economy. [1, p. 60]
The opposite category to price parity is disparity. In essence, disparity is inequality, a violation of the principle of equivalence, equal benefit in financial and economic relations. Disparity is a violation of the ratio of prices for agricultural products sold by its producers and prices for industrial goods and services purchased by agricultural enterprises for their own needs. The disparity is manifested in the outpacing growth of price indices for industrial goods and services compared to the price index for agricultural products.
The price disparity in Ukraine was inherited from the planned-directive economy. According to the research of Shpychak O., a significant disparity between prices for agricultural products and prices for products consumed by agriculture took place in the early 90s of last century. [7]
Over the past 15 years, the rate of disparity has slowed, however, as a result of its significant rate in the previous period there was a huge decrease in the level of material and technical condition in agriculture. This caused a long-term further "echo effect", which affected the low technical armament of farmers, a significant and prolonged decline in purchasing power, etc.
According to Eskendarova A. [4], the reasons for the unfavorable ratio of prices for agriculture during inter-industry exchanges should be sought not so much in the patterns of development of the domestic economy during the transition period, but in much deeper trends in the development of the world economy.
According to expert estimates, in developed countries in order to maintain social stability and at the same time maintain low prices for agricultural and other traditional goods, it is necessary to heavily subsidize their own producers of these goods. Thus, 30% more funds per unit of production were spent on agricultural development in the United States in the 2000s than in other sectors of the economy.
On average, in the EU, prices for industrial equipment for current production exceeded prices for agricultural products over 10 years by 12%, and prices for investment goods - even by 34%. Moreover, the most developed countries are characterized by even greater disparity in prices. So, in Denmark it amounted to almost 24%, in the UK and Germany - about 20%, and in Austria - about 30%. Thus, a rather high disparity occurred even with special price support programs in the EU and, in general, with enormous state support.
An attempt by state forces to establish such parity for all sectors would mean the cessation of the existence of basic market mechanisms that ensure the emergence of new industries and products, increased competitiveness, quality, and efficiency. On the other hand, the presence of industries that do not have opportunities for expanded reproduction over a long period of time inevitably leads to their loss of competitiveness (in the credit, investment, and labor markets) and, accordingly, to their degradation. Therefore, we should not say about establishing inter-industry exchange parity, but about assisting individual industries in significantly reducing the negative impact of the lack of parity.
Relative parity is called a state of inter-industry relations, in which the return on capital, wages in agriculture are below the average for the national economy in a given period, but it does not prevent the deviation of expanded reproduction in the industry rate, recognized in the period the minimum necessary.
The question of the minimum necessary profitability of agricultural production is very complicated. The minimum profitability required to calculate the relative parity and losses from it should not be higher than the average for the national economy. There is an opinion justified by economic calculations that the profitability of agricultural enterprises should not be lower than 2730% [3], according to other sources - not less than 40% [4].
The current state of price relations in the agricultural sector of Ukraine is characterized by the presence of all known imbalances. First of all, this is the disparity in prices for agricultural and industrial products (services) used in agriculture.
Consider the dynamics of sales price indices of agricultural products and industrial producers in Ukraine for 2000-2019 in Figure 1 (according to the State Statistics Service of Ukraine).
160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70
01 00 00 22
2 0 0 2
3 0 0 2
4 0 0 2
5 0 0 2
6 0 0 2
7 0 0 2
8 0 0 2
9 0 0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
■Sales price index of agricultural products —»«—Industrial producer price index
Fig. 1. Growth rates ofprices for agricultural and industrial products in Ukraine (relative to the previous year's price level) [8]
The growth rates of prices for both agricultural and industrial products are quite dynamic. In certain periods, in particular, in 2000, 2003, 2007, 2010 and 2015, the growth of prices for agricultural products exceeded the growth of prices for industrial products.
In other periods, prices for industrial products grew faster. In 2002 and 2013, the level of prices for
1400 -
agricultural products decreased compared to the level of previous years by 12.6% and 2.9%, respectively, while prices for industrial products increased by 5.7% in 2002, and by 1,7% in 2013.
In general, over the last 19 years, prices for agricultural products have increased 7 times, and prices for industrial products - 12.1 times (Fig. 2).
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
cN m 000 000 222
4 0 0 2
5 0 0 2
6 0 0 2
7 0 0 2
8 0 0 2
9 0 0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
—•—Sales price index of agricultural products —»—Industrial producer price index
Fig. 2. Comparison of sales price indices of agricultural and industrial products (%, relative to the price level in 2001) /8]
Thus, in 2019, the price indices for agricultural and industrial products, relative to the price level in 2001, were 721.0% and 1205.9%, respectively. In the dynamics, the growth of the rate of prices for industrial products relative to the growth rate of prices for agricultural products is accelerating, as evidenced by the
increase in the distance between the corresponding curves.
Significant price disparity is observed for most types of agricultural products. Consider the data presented in table. 1.
Table 1.
Comparison of sales prices of agricultural and processing enterprises in Ukraine, 2018 [8]
Average prices of agricultural products sold by enterprises, UAH/t Average sales prices of enterprises in the processing industry,UAH / t The share of the price of agricultural enterprises in the retail price of goods, %
Wheat 5850 Wheat flour 10277 56,0
Oil seed 9900 Sunflower oil 34566 28,6
Farm animals 33331 Beef 124272 26,8
Milk 7602 Pasteurized milk 22373 33,9
In 2018, the average price for wheat of different classes was UAH 5,850 for 1 ton. Wheat flour processing enterprises sold at a price of UAH 10,277 for 1 ton. The share of wheat producers in the retail price of the final product was 56,0%. Producers of oilseeds, livestock products received only 27-34% of the retail
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
□ Sales price index of agricultural products
□ Aggregate index of costs for agricultural production
□ Price index for material and technical resources of industrial origin consumed by agriculture
price despite the fact that their share of costs for the production of final products is 70%.
The ratio of indices of sales prices of agricultural products and costs of its production is evidenced by the data presented in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Comparison of indices of sales prices and costs of agricultural production, % (to the level of the previous year) /8]
In 2015, the growth rate of prices at which agricultural producers sold their products exceeded the growth rate of total costs and costs of material and technical resources of industrial origin consumed by agriculture, in particular. But in subsequent periods the situation has changed and the results of 2018, while prices of agricultural products rose to the level of prices in 2017 by 9,3%, the total cost to manufacture the same products increased by 14,0%, including prices for material and technical resources of industrial origin - by 15,9%. Such dynamics continue to take place in the future. Outpacing growth rates of production costs lead to a decrease in the level of profitability of agricultural production, lower profits of producers, their standard of living.
There are various methods of studying the violation of the ratio of prices for products of different sectors of the economy. We agree with the scientific approach, which assumes that the manifestations of disparity are methodologically more reasonable to study through the ability of agricultural producers to acquire a unit of a certain type of material and technical resources by natural exchange for a certain type of products. [5]
We considered an approach that compares quantitative price changes for diesel, ammonium nitrate with wheat and sugar. Comparisons of the amount of wheat and sugar that need to be sold for the purchase of energy resources on average in Ukraine during 1990-2019 are presented in table 2.
Table 2.
Comparison of the amount of wheat and sugar that need to be sold to purchase a unit of fuel and mineral fertiliz-_ers in Ukraine [8]_
Indicator 1990 2000 2010 2015 2019 2019 to 1990, times
Wholesale prices, UAH/t
Diesel fuel 145 1873 5928 14970 27620 X
Ammonium nitrate 70 420 1560 5718 9250 X
Sales prices by agricultural enterprises, UAH/t
Wheat 272 487 1086 2796 5800 X
Sugar 780 1577 5717 9633 11020 X
The number of products that need to be sold to purchase a unit of resources, tons
Wheat
Diesel fuel 0,53 3,85 5,46 5,35 4,76 9,0
Ammonium nitrate 0,26 0,86 1,44 2,04 1,59 6,1
Sugar
Diesel fuel 0,19 1,19 1,04 1,55 2,51 13,2
Ammonium nitrate 0,09 0,27 0,27 0,59 0,84 9,3
The presented calculations show that in 1990, in order to purchase 1 ton of diesel fuel, an agricultural producer had to sell 0.53 tons of wheat or 0.19 tons of sugar. 1 ton of ammonium nitrate was equivalent to 0.26 tons of wheat or 0.09 sugar. In 2019, compared to 1990, agricultural producers had to sell 9 times more wheat to buy 1 ton of diesel fuel and 13.2 times more sugar. For the purchase of ammonium nitrate, these figures are slightly lower, in particular 6.1 and 9.3 times. As already noted, in recent years there has been a slowdown in the growth of the disparity in prices for agricultural products and products consumed by agriculture.
Most authors consider the problem of price parity for agricultural and industrial products to be one of the most urgent and acute problems of the agricultural economy.
The subject of heated discussion is the role of state regulation of price proportions in the agricultural sector and the degree of state support for agricultural producers in order to overcome the negative consequences of price disparity.
The current state of price relations in the agro-industrial complex of Ukraine is characterized by the presence of the following main imbalances:
- disparity in prices for agricultural and industrial products (services) used in agriculture;
- imbalances in price ratios, expressed in a decrease in the share of revenue from the sale of agricultural products in wholesale and retail prices for food products made from agricultural raw materials;
- imbalances in agriculture itself, caused by the actions of both external factors (especially the disparity in prices between agriculture and resource-saving sectors), and a decrease in the efficiency of agricultural production.
Under these conditions, there was a need to develop a system of measures aimed at optimizing price ratios between agricultural products and other sectors of the economy in order to ensure the profitability of agricultural production, saturate the market with agricultural products, raw materials and food.
In Ukraine, there are different points of view both on determining the parity ratio of farm prices for agricultural products and prices of means of production for agriculture, and on the need to observe this parity. The most common opinion is that the optimization of price ratios in the agro-industrial complex is a process of forming the level of prices and price proportions for agricultural products and other sectors of the economy, which provides the possibility of extended reproduction for the bulk of agricultural producers.
These scientists believe that the natural and economic features of reproduction in agriculture necessitate the establishment of a profitability standard in agriculture at a level not lower than the average for the national economy.
Sabluk P. proposes to move from indicators of the level of profitability to the methodology for determining the rate of profit. In other words, he believes that if prices for goods used in agricultural production are high, then prices for agricultural products should also be high [6]. However, with the existing assessment of production assets in agricultural and industrial enterprises of the country, the application of this methodology to determine the parity of inter-industry exchange seems very complex and biased.
Some scholars believe that it is ineffective to maintain parity in prices for agricultural products and material resources for the village, and suggest observing the principle of parity in incomes of the rural and urban population, acting through taxation, state support for the pension service, encouraging the development of industry and employment in rural areas. However, this does not take into account the population's demand for food.
In Ukraine, price disparity not only exists in a crisis and unprofitable agricultural production, but, along with the lack of a land market, underdeveloped mortgage lending, and imperfect production relations, is one of the main reasons for this process.
The balancing of price ratios must be carried out in several directions, giving priority to economic methods of regulation. In order to form national and regional food funds and protect the interests of producers, it is
necessary to more actively apply guaranteed and target prices.
The analysis of regulatory documents shows the presence of certain contradictions in determining the level and functions of guaranteed purchase prices. The main one is that, on the one hand, guaranteed prices are regarded as the lower limit for the functioning of free market prices, and, on the other hand, they must ensure that agricultural producers (taking into account other forms of state support) receive income sufficient for expanded reproduction.
Of great importance for the stabilization and revi-talization of agricultural production are the target (equivalent, parity) prices. Target prices are designed to compensate the producer for his production costs (normative), average wages in the region and ensure profits. From an assessment of the content of the target price functions offered for use in agriculture in Ukraine, we can see their significant difference from similar prices in US agriculture. In essence, the role of these prices is comparable to the role of profitability standards, which formed the basis for the formation of purchase prices and profits in sizes that ensure the transition of agricultural enterprises on self-financing in a planned economy.
The limited budget funds, the inconsistency of legal acts on pricing issues in market conditions, make it preferable to use the most flexible mechanism that is adequate to market relations - the mechanism of commodity and procurement interventions. The operation of this mechanism through procurement interventions guarantees a certain market for agricultural producers and through commodity interventions ensures the repayment of budget loans and inhibits the growth of prices for agricultural products and foodstuffs in the interests of consumers. The mechanism of purchasing and commodity interventions is directly related to the functioning of market (contractual) prices as the main form of economic relations in the market of agricultural products, raw materials and food.
The pricing policy should include a mechanism for the state pledge of agricultural products, which has become widespread in many foreign countries. The market situation determines the fate of the pledged products - it can be returned to producers for sale at higher prices in the free market or left in the property of the pledge holder.
Proposals for the application of guaranteed, target and collateral prices to support agricultural producers are based on the experience of foreign countries.
One of the reasons for the disparity in prices for agricultural and industrial products is called the monopolism of enterprises in the first and third sectors of the agricultural sector. The lack of competition in them contributes to the preservation of the costly approach to pricing at processing and resource-supplying enterprises, which leads to an increase in the cost of agricultural products.
However, the producers themselves also use the passive pricing method and lay in the prices of agricultural products an expensive, extensive level of their management. Therefore, comparing the prices of supply and agricultural enterprises, we get not actual, but
artificial price disparity, which, first of all, reflects extensive production methods in a particular industry.
Therefore, in order to establish the equivalence of the exchange between the agricultural and industrial spheres, it is necessary to go not by subsidizing the first, but by improving the approach to pricing products.
The monopoly effect of the processing and trade sectors is manifested in a violation of the proportions of the distribution of income from the sale of agricultural products between the main participants in the technological chain. To eliminate these negative processes, scientists and practitioners suggest two ways. One of them involves the use of administrative (direct) methods of state regulation, the second - economic (indirect) levers, which are more consistent with a market economy.
With the price regulation of natural monopolies, supporters of administrative management methods propose:
- set limit prices (tariffs) or limit coefficients of changes in energy prices;
- adjust the level of these prices using the consumer price index; introduce a marginal level of profitability of production (35-40%);
- use the cost comparison method.
In many countries, including Ukraine, direct regulation of energy prices is applied, but international experience and modern theoretical developments indicate that the most promising direction of the state's economic policy in the sectors of natural monopolies is their restructuring. It is understood as the introduction of elements of economic competition and the creation of prerequisites and conditions for the development of competition in relevant markets, accompanied by their deregulation.
To improve the price relations of agricultural enterprises with material-technical and processing enterprises, supporters of a "strong" state propose:
- setting marginal levels of profitability of these enterprises;
- restriction of margins of trade intermediary organizations that increase the cost of industrial products by more than 25-50%;
- introduction of price ratios for agricultural raw materials and final products produced from them, etc.[9]
However, the application of the above methods is more characteristic of a planned than a market economic system. Therefore, in solving pricing problems, it is necessary to use factors of economic, indirect impact, which, in addition to procurement and commodity interventions, include:
- tax benefits for industrial enterprises that fix or lower prices for products sold to agriculture or differentiate tax rates depending on the level of profitability of enterprises;
- preferential lending to agricultural enterprises on the basis of a tender for specific programs; the supply of material and technical resources to agriculture on leasing, subject to the coordination of prices for them with agricultural producers;
- stimulation of integration processes; applying threshold prices and customs duties to protect the domestic market.
To maintain the equivalence of exchange along the entire technological chain - from the field to the food consumer - such an organizational mechanism as cooperation and integration of these enterprises is of the utmost importance.
Among the levers of indirect regulation, the leading place is given to the financial and credit system. In foreign countries, the amount of agricultural financing provided by lending and subsidies depends on the economic situation of the country and the policies of the international organizations to which the country is a member, for example, the amount of subsidies in the southern countries (New Zealand, Australia) is less than $10/ha, while in the north (Norway) - $3500/ha. Budget subsidies are usually received only by those farmers who participate in the implementation of state agrarian programs.
In the USA, EU and other countries, the following target programs are in place:
- conservation and removal of land;
- food assistance to the poor;
- marketing and inspection; rural social development;
- support for agricultural exports and others. [9]
Taking into account world experience, the state
budget funds should be directed to support pedigree production and elite seed farming, improving soil fertility and animal productivity, crop insurance, compensation for damage from natural disasters, adverse climatic conditions, etc.
World experience also indicates that a prerequisite for the effective functioning of a market-type economy is a developed commodity market infrastructure. The level of development of market infrastructure in Ukraine does not correspond to the conditions of free movement of goods and contributes to increasing the disparity in prices for agricultural and industrial products.
In conclusion, it should be noted that:
- state regulation of prices should not be aimed at limiting the scope of the market mechanism, but at increasing its effectiveness;
- price level regulation should be economically justified;
- requires a state monopoly on the production and sale of certain types of goods, products, services;
- it is necessary to actively fight the manifestation of monopolism, etc.
These actions should concern not only sectors of the public sector, but also private entrepreneurs, if the state considers it appropriate to pursue a restrictive pricing policy in terms of the interests of the country's economy as a whole.
The proposed measures will optimize the price ratios between agricultural products and other sectors of the economy, create conditions for ensuring the profitability of agricultural production, and saturate the market with competitive agricultural products, raw materials and food.
References
1. Avdeev M.V., (2014), "Methodical approaches to determining price disparity in the agricultural sector of the economy", Education, science and production, vol. 4, pp. 59-62, [Online], available at: http:/www.sci-education.ru.
2. Bodnar O.V., (2017), "Methodological approaches to the study of price disparity for agricultural products", Prychornomorski economichni studii, vol.16, pp. 32-36.
3. Borkhunov N.A. How to calculate the effectiveness of agriculture? // Economics of agriculture in Russia. 2007. No. 12. P. 24
4. Dosova (Eskendarova), A.G. Disproportions of the agricultural sector and their impact on the reproduction of fixed capital / A.G. Eskendarova // Economic sciences. —2009. —№ 61. - P. 167—171.
5. Feniak, L. (2018), "Violation of price parity and ways of overcoming it in the economy of Ukraine", Efektyvna ekonomika, [Online], vol. 5, available at: http://www.economy.nayka.com.ua
6. Sabluk P. Agriculture in the modern economy of Ukraine / P. Sabluk // AIC: Economics, Management. - 2011. - No. 4. - C. 78-83.
7. Shpychak O.M., Bodnar O.V., Cobuta I.V. (2009), The system of organizational and economic mechanisms of functioning of the main agro-food subcomplexes of crop production in Ukraine], "Nichlava", Kyiv, Ukraine, p. 406.
8. State Statistic Service of Ukraine, [Online], available at: http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua/
9. Yunusova P.S., (2012), "Overty as a condition price disparity agricultural competitivtntss", [Online], available at: // https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/pre-odolenie-tsenovogo-dispariteta-kak-uslovie-pov-ysheniya-konkurentosposobnosti-selskohozyaystven-noy-produktsii
