CC BY
37. Padmavathi, P. (2014). Effect of acupressure vs reflexology on pre-menstrual syndrome among adolescent girls-a pilot study. Nurs J India, Sep-Oct, 105(5), 236-239.
8. Prilepskaya, V.N., Mezhevitinova, E.A., Sasunova, R.A. and Ivanova, E.V. (2012). Magnesium role in a pathogenesis of a premenstrual syndrome. Russian Journal of the obstetrician-gynecologist, 3, 81 -87.
9. Tacani, P.M., RibeiroDde, O., Barros Guimaraes, B.E., Machado, A.F. and Tacani, R.E. (2015). Characterization of symptoms and edema distribution in premenstrual syndrome. Int J Womens Health, 7, 297-303.
THE MAIN ASPECTS OF INTERACTION GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS IN SHAPING THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC SPACE OF A REGION
Abstract
This paper considers the issue of interaction government and business in shaping the socio - economic space of a region. It is known that the business develops in favourable business climate, and at the same time it shapes him, what makes the application of measures of state support of business is an important condition for the successful achievement of national socio-economic priorities. So, the purpose of the article is to determinate the main directs of interaction of government and business.
Keywords
economic space, government economic policy, business support
AUTHORS
Larisa Belousova
PhD in Economics Department of Economics
and Management Southwest State University Kursk, Russia bellars2010@yandex.ru
Inna Babenko
PhD in Economics, Assistant Professor Department of Economics and Management Southwest State University
Kursk, Russia babenkoinny@gmail.com
The successful solution of a whole set of problems, collectively forming the positive dynamics of sustainable socio-economic development of the country and its regions, is directly related to the development of the business. The latter, in turn, is largely determined by the actions of the state. Thus, the question arises about the implementation of business support measures from the state and the formation of appropriate policy.
Note that in the theoretical aspect of such support not being unequivocal perception and interpretation, many of the directions and methods of state support of business remain controversial and contradictory. At the practical level, the state policy of support of business in Russia is often of situation is due to the current economic situation, previous decisions, traditions and other similar circumstances and, moreover, is often perceived and implemented perverted as protectionism.
Among the negative moments in the development of the modern practice of state support of business in Russia's regions, we note the following:
1) is implemented primarily differentiated on the basis of sectoral approach in defining the directions and objectives of business development;
2) Instruments of state support of business projects (replicated) from the Federal to the regional level without the required in these cases, diversity in structure, and algorithms of use of any tools;
3) used government tools to support business wear, generally universal, despite the obvious effect (to be provided on a multi-pronged approach of management tools, a variety of expected positive changes in the characteristics of business activities) limits the scope of "point" focus of economic and organizational support of the state support on the specific parameters of business development.
One of the most important functions of the state in its relations with business formation and organization of economic space.
The foundations of the doctrine about space and about the economic system, as the elements of economic space, adequately represented in domestic and foreign scientific literature (Chekmarev, 2001; Krugman, 1995; Perroux, 1950; Quigley, 2001, etc). However, the existing concept of economic space is the wide variety of its methodological foundations.
These circumstances explain the particular interest of scientists to such research areas as:
- the phenomenon of space, structure and transformation of economic space, the main characteristics and typology of the economic space of a region (Belousova, Emelyanov Kuziboev, Maltseva, 2014; Biyakov);
- integration (disintegration) of economic space, socio-economic differentiation of regions (Semina; Treshevsky, Litvinov, 2013; King, 1992);
modeling and regional dimension, regional economic policy development (Sadkov, 2012; Arbia, 2001; Fukuchi, 2000; ¡sard, 1960);
- formation and implementation of state policy of support business (Belousova, 2013; Litvinov, 2013(I); Litvinov, 2013(H); Porter, 1996; Yuili, 1990, etc).
In fact, attempts to generate an integrated theoretical and methodological platform for evaluating the dynamics of economic space, forecasting of influence of the transformation processes in the socio-economic situation in the country and the regions, to ensure consistency between the economic interests of business entities as a necessary condition for the formation of economic space.
With regard to the organization of economic space of the country (region), its essence is to achieve orderly interaction of such constituent subsystems-spaces, as a social, informative, innovative, technical, technological, natural resource, financial and other, allocated for research purposes to explore a particular part of the system and relations of interaction. The role of the state here is determined by the fact that each economic measure influences the total order and the total relationship is not can be known separate economic actors - this requires the state, as the representative of the national economy as a whole (Eucken, 1996). The organization of social and economic space is accomplished through a variety of public policy instruments and their aggregates, including in the field of business support.
The continuing high level of social and economic differentiation of Russian regions places special demands on the conduct of regional economic policy: on the one hand, must have a system-wide focus (especially social), and with another - to consider the specifics of each particular region, the level and prospects of its socio-economic development (Litvinov, 2013).
Thus, well-functioning business is an indicator of positive relationships with government within the framework of policy support.
The analysis of the current state and trends of business development in Russia and the mechanism of its state support in the regions allowed to identify among the achievements:
- granting priority to such directions of the state support of business, as the formation of an attractive investment climate, stimulation of investment activity, assistance to establishment and development of innovation system of the region, increase of innovation activity and competitiveness of business structures;
- update criterial bases for selection of recipients of the state support of business, satisfying the requirements of innovativeness, competitiveness in domestic and international markets, import substitution potential;
- orientation of the policy of support of business on the formation of points of economic growth, ensuring lower level of regional socio-economic asymmetries, etc.
The state, thus, using the adequate condition of the economic system methods, should provide support for the growth points of national economy, to promote the effective inclusion of the country into the system of international economic relations, growth of competitiveness of domestic products on domestic and foreign markets.
However, there are a number of problems. A particular problem was the definition of a core implementation principle function of the socio-economic space: how the state should behave - to follow the development of the private sector or, alternatively, to determine the direction and ways of its development? In our opinion, the role of business in defining the prospects of development of society cannot be defined as leading. The business is leading in the field of current economic actions and ways for their implementation, and to establish effective long-term strategy of development, it can not, because it is focused on a specific immediate outcome. Such an orientation is recognized even by proponents of the greatest possible restriction of state participation in economic processes. Therefore, the principle of the implementation of the function specified by the state policy of business support at Federal and regional levels characterizes the order of the activities of the state.
It should be noted that unlike the private sector, the state has always operated smoothly. The degree of fulfilment of these plans was and remains different, but the principle of planned economic activities of the state always implemented (Migunova, Belousova, Babich, 2014; Belousova, Babich, Migunova, 2014). It is generally accepted that a socialist society based on planned state economy, in fact, did not provide sufficiently high rates of economic development, lost the competition to the market economy. However, adherence to the principles poorly regulated market in the postSoviet space did not allow to achieve a high level of development (Babich, Belousova, 2013). Therefore, to solve the issue on principle, based on which the organization of social and economic space, it is necessary not from the point of view of counting the mistakes and missed opportunities, with positions proven historical development of the strategic role of the state.
From the recognition in General of the principle of planned economic activities of the state derive more specific problem: what and how to plan for, predict how to implement this principle in different subsystems of the national economy. Fundamentally for the development of domestic business that the principle of planning the actions of the state ensures the predictability of state socio-economic system. If the government will be guided by the principle of "natural adjustment" to the needs of the business in a certain area in a specific period, then macro - and meso-economic environment is very unstable. This will create additional business for the area of instability, risk, low predictability.
Any system is more than the sum of its constituent parts, subsystems. Therefore, to ensure its integrity it is necessary to anticipate the results, based on the domination of the General over the particular. The principle of operation of a General not necessarily extend to the private elements of the system operate on grounds other than the system as a whole. In turn, each subsystem, as a whole obeying the laws of functioning of the system, there are some own rules. Therefore, the application of the principle of planning
for the state against his own economic activity does not necessarily apply to the whole society, the whole economy or all of its subsystems.
Thus, it is possible to speak about realization of principle of managerial influence, the balance of the basic management functions: planning, organization, control, regulation.
The content of this principle in the organization of socio-economic space at the Federal and regional levels differs primarily objects and control methods. At the national level is managed by the main macroeconomic parameters on the basis of indirect methods and direct control of the development of engineering and social infrastructure of national importance. At the regional level the composition of objects is specified strategic plans and implemented them in the framework of the programs formed on the basis of the plans of the Federal bodies of power and administration.
Given the generally low level of development of the Russian economy, a high regional differentiation in economic conditions and the results of the business activities, there is a need to implement such function to support the business, as a way to boost its activity, especially in the regions that have the necessary economic potential but not realizing it in the proper degree. The implementation of support functions should be carried out at different levels of power and control (Belousova, 2013). The most important subject of the implementation are authorities and management at the Federal level, because they have the greatest economic and organizational resources and authority. At the same time, the regional power and governance structures cannot be excluded from the process due to the Federal structure of the state and possession of information about the state and development prospects of particular business structures, particularly regional and local scale.
In connection with objective demand functions the state support of business is inevitably the question arises about the basic principle of its implementation. In our opinion, such is the active principle of protectionism: in contrast to classical protectionism, the state should not over-protect the national economic space from the competition of foreign enterprises; however, it must fully support the desire of national business to foreign expansion double positive effect: on the one hand, foreign enterprises bring to the national economy, modern products, methods of doing business, invest; on the other - increases the specific weight of the most active and competitive Russian business, there is a self-study advanced methods of farming, management, use of resources. In this process there is a place for regional level management: regional management structure geographically and institutionally closer than Federal, to the "'place of residence" of business units, wider opportunities for them to communicate with representatives of the business sector. Therefore, the active principle of protectionism, implemented at the Federal level must be supplemented by the principle of the formation of competitive behavior as the natural state of business structures.
Note that currently this principle has not been fully implemented. In fact, it is at the regional and the local level formed a large part of the monopoly structures, focused on geographically limited markets. Authorities and management, creating preferential treatment to businesses "local origin" is essentially transformerait national competitive space. In the basis of formation of such small monopolistic structures are mostly not legal, and behavioral norms.
It creates a vicious cycle: regional and local government agencies carry out the protection for a limited range of relatively small businesses, regional markets receive the goods and services of inferior quality or more expensive and, accordingly, receive inflated business income. Thus, the conditions for the redistribution of this income in favor of the "administrative donors and obtain preferences in the future, that is, to corruption; reduced incentives for promotion of business outside of regions and countries; attenuated production capabilities of business units, decreases their competitiveness; there is a need
to further protectionism - the circle closes. Logically, breaking that vicious circle possible in the links, is relatively easy amenable to transformation. The business may not be the link because it requires substantial material and financial resources to change behaviors. The bodies of power and administration is easier, from an objective point of view, change the model behavior, so they can and should be considered as the point of breaking the vicious circle.
In conclusion, we note that the implementation of the function of improving the competitiveness of domestic business on the basis of the principles of active protectionism and the formation of competitive behavior can not occur in isolation from the basic management functions - planning, organization, control, regulation, based on systematic managerial effects.
The development of the theoretical principles that define the essence of state policy of support business, and study the basic functions in the new mechanism of its implementation is an important way of scientific research in the aspect of formation of conditions for formation of positive dynamics of sustainable development of Russian regions and to improve the competitive status of the country in the global economic space.
REFERENCES
1. Belousova L. S., Emelyanov S. G., Kuziboev E. N., Maltseva I. F. (2014) Planning for structural transformation of the economic space (the hypothesis about the future of the Russian planning system): monograph Moscow: Universitetskaya kniga. p. 252
2. Belousova L. S. (2013) The Mechanism of realization of state policy of support business. Journal of Creative economy. 9 (81). p. 24-32.
3. Biyakov O. A. (2004) The Theory of economic space: methodological and region aspects. Tomsk: Publishing house Tom. University press. p.152
4. Litvinov A.A. (2013) State support of business policy: abstract dis. ... The candidate of economic sciences: 08.00.05 / Southwestern State University. Kursk
5. Litvinov A. A. (2013) Priority areas and instruments of regional policy of support of business. Region: systems, Economics, management. 3(22). p. 42-47.
6. Migunova, E. A., Belousova L. S., Babich T. N. (2014) Development planning in market conditions: theory and methodology: monograph / under the editorship of the Dr. Ekon. Sciences L. S. Belousova. Kursk: Planeta+". p. 166
7. Eucken V. (1996) Fundamentals of the national economy. Economics. p. 351
8. Sadkov V. G. (2012) Regional economic policy: the essence and content. Izvestia South-West state University. 1-2 (40). p. 91A-96.
9. Semina T. A. Problems of the disintegration of economic space of the country and of differentiation of socio-economic status of regions. http://www.sbcinfo.ru/articles/27-28_05_1999conf/4_3.htm.
10. Treshevsky Y. I. & Litvinov A. A. (2013) Entrepreneurial activity in Russian regions - status and trends in the post-crisis period. Management consulting. 6. p.p. 61-71.
11. Chekmarev V. V. (2001) Theory of economic space. Bulletin of Saint-Petersburg University of economy and Finance. 3
12. Arbia G. (2001) Modelling the geography of economic activities on a continuous space. Papers in Regional Science.V. 80.
13. Babich T.N., Belousova L.S. (2013) Evolution and Characteristics of Planning at an Enterprise in Russia. World Applied Sciences Journal. T. 24. (Is 11). p.p. 24-1428.
14. Belousova L.S., Babich T.N., Migunova E.A. (2014) The Development of a Planning Toolset at An Enterprise in Russia. MEJSR. V21. (11). ttp://www.idosi.org/mejsr/mejsr21(11)14.htm
15. Fukuchi T. (2000) Long-run development of a multi-regional economy. Papers in Regional Science. V. 79.
16. Isard W. (1960) Methods of regional analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press
17. King D. N. (1992) Local Government Economics in Theory and Practice. London: Routledge, p. 412
18. Krugman P. (1995) Development, geography and economic theory. Cambridge: MIT Press
19. Perroux F. (1950) Economic space: theory and applications. Quarterly Journal of Economics. V. 64.
20. Porter M. (1996) Competitive advantage, agglomeration economies, and regional policy. International Regional Science Review. V. 19.
21. Quigley J. (2001) The renaissance in regional research. The Annals of Regional Science. V. 35
22. Yuili D. (1990) Regional policy in the European Community: The role of regional incentives. L.:Croom Helm. p. 251
