Regular Monitoring Of Socio-Economic Development Of The Subjects Of The Russian Federation[Разработка Системы Регулярного Мониторинга Социально-Экономического Развития Субъектов Российской Федерации]

This study focuses on the changes in the dynamics of socio-economic development and interregional inequality of the Russian regions in 2019-2020. Peculiarities of territorial development of the Russian Federation, unevenness and key trends in the socio-economic development of Russian regions have become central issues of the federal development agenda in the last few years. At the same time, at the present stage there is no comprehensive database and systematically updated aggregated analytical information that allows tracking key trends in the development of the economies of the subjects of the Russian Federation on a regular basis. The goal of the study is to develop and test the methodology for building a system for regular monitoring and evaluation of the main directions of socio-economic development of the subjects of the Russian Federation using statistical and departmental data. In accordance with the overall goal, the following objectives are determined to be addressed within the study: conducting a comprehensive analysis of the socio-economic development of the subjects of the Russian Federation in recent years; determining the composition of the spheres (aspects) of development and indicators of systematic assessment of socio-economic development of the subjects of the Russian Federation (separately for monthly, quarterly and year-end monitoring); developing a system for visualizing the key socio-economic processes in the regions of Russia. Considering earlier assessments of crisis effects in the regions of the Russian Federation, the hypothesis was formulated that inequality and divergence of directions of socio-economic development between different regions of the Russian Federation have significantly increased in recent years. The results achieved are as follows: examples of design of systematic monitoring of socio-economic indicators in the context of the subjects of the Russian Federation were given; indicators for the establishment of regular monitoring of socio-economic development of the subjects of the Russian Federation were selected; proposals on the publication format, structure and content of regular monitoring of socio-economic development of subjects were made; a methodology for integrated assessment of short-term dynamics of socio-economic development of subjects of the Russian Federation for monitoring and identifying crisis situations was developed; a methodology for conducting an integrated assessment of the socio-economic development level of subjects of the Russian Federation was elaborated, with the ability to track its changes over time; the peculiarities of territorial development, interregional inequality, socio-economic development of the subjects of the Russian Federation in 2019-2020 (based on annual indicators) and in 2020 and the first 8 months of 2021 (based on operational indicators) were analyzed; the basic trends of territorial development, which failed to be overcome during the crisis and post-crisis recovery, were identified, namely: the concentration of the economic and investment activity in Moscow (to the detriment of other large regions) and gradual but slow improvement in the level of socio-economic development of Russian regions; stabilization or reduction of interregional inequality indicators, convergence of the dynamics of socio-economic development of the regions with the national average. Materials for in-depth diagnostics of socio-economic development of key regions have also been prepared. The scientific novelty of the work lies in the development of a three-level monitoring system, including annual monitoring, which focuses on interregional inequality, medium-term monitoring aimed at studying the dynamics of interregional differences, and short-term monitoring focused on assessing current changes in the regions. According to the results, it can be stated that the COVID-19 crisis had only a short-term effect on territorial development in Russia. Unlike the previous crises, interregional inequality did not grow in 2020 and stabilized in 2021. At the same time, for most socio-economic indicators, the medium-term dynamics of the regions were unidirectional. The situation is somewhat worse in the regions with high socio-economic development per capita, whose economy depends on oil production. Only two regions were still showing clear signs of crisis phenomena. While the crisis in the Sakhalin Region is largely time-serving, the decline in Komi Republic is systemic and has been going on for several years (started before 2020). Given the relatively positive socio-economic dynamics after the crisis, there is a significant change in the system of inter-budgetary relations and federal support measures. Measures are being actively implemented to reduce the independence of regional administrations in determining the goals of spending inter-budget transfers (the share of transfer payments is decreasing in favor of subsidies). While this situation has little effect on regions with high fiscal capacity (and low transfers) due to the relatively small amounts of transfers they receive, then in highly subsidized regions the changes become very large-scale (up to dozens of percent of the total budget revenues) and may limit the regional initiative in the future. At the same time, the Government has launched incentives aimed at supporting breakthrough investment and projects in the regions. The shift in distribution of these financial resources towards financial and credit support changes the logic of the project formation in the regions. Almost all the funds provided are repayable, which means they must be used towards the growth of tax and non-tax revenues of the regional budgets. However, the mechanisms for allocating funds from the “infrastructure menu” measures do not take into account the actual needs of the regions and are based either on proportional distribution (budget infrastructure loans) or on previous borrowing history.