Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy: Perspectives from Russian Experiences (Research for Development) 303070193X, 9783030701932

Citation preview

Research for Development

Julia V. Ragulina Arutyun A. Khachaturyan Arsen S. Abdulkadyrov Zoya Sh. Babaeva   Editors

Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy Perspectives from Russian Experiences

Research for Development Series Editors Emilio Bartezzaghi, Milan, Italy Giampio Bracchi, Milan, Italy Adalberto Del Bo, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy Ferran Sagarra Trias, Department of Urbanism and Regional Planning, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Francesco Stellacci, Supramolecular NanoMaterials and Interfaces Laboratory (SuNMiL), Institute of Materials, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland Enrico Zio, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy Ecole Centrale Paris, Paris, France

The series Research for Development serves as a vehicle for the presentation and dissemination of complex research and multidisciplinary projects. The published work is dedicated to fostering a high degree of innovation and to the sophisticated demonstration of new techniques or methods. The aim of the Research for Development series is to promote well-balanced sustainable growth. This might take the form of measurable social and economic outcomes, in addition to environmental benefits, or improved efficiency in the use of resources; it might also involve an original mix of intervention schemes. Research for Development focuses on the following topics and disciplines: Urban regeneration and infrastructure, Info-mobility, transport, and logistics, Environment and the land, Cultural heritage and landscape, Energy, Innovation in processes and technologies, Applications of chemistry, materials, and nanotechnologies, Material science and biotechnology solutions, Physics results and related applications and aerospace, Ongoing training and continuing education. Fondazione Politecnico di Milano collaborates as a special co-partner in this series by suggesting themes and evaluating proposals for new volumes. Research for Development addresses researchers, advanced graduate students, and policy and decision-makers around the world in government, industry, and civil society. THE SERIES IS INDEXED IN SCOPUS

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13084

Julia V. Ragulina · Arutyun A. Khachaturyan · Arsen S. Abdulkadyrov · Zoya Sh. Babaeva Editors

Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy Perspectives from Russian Experiences

Editors Julia V. Ragulina Department of Economics RUDN University Moscow, Russia Arsen S. Abdulkadyrov Research Institute of MEPS Research Institute of Management, Economics, Politics, and Sociology of Dagestan State University of National Economy Makhachkala, Russia

Arutyun A. Khachaturyan Market Economy Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences Moscow, Russia Zoya Sh. Babaeva Research Institute of MEPS Dagestan State University of National Economy Makhachkala, Russia

ISSN 2198-7300 ISSN 2198-7319 (electronic) Research for Development ISBN 978-3-030-70193-2 ISBN 978-3-030-70194-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Introduction: Modern Economy on Its Way to Sustainable Development

Sustainable development is the most important focus of the modern economy and a criterion for the qualitative assessment of its progress. Maintaining sustainability at all levels of economies provides an enabling environment for their highly efficient functioning and global competitiveness. Increased attention to sustainability issues has been manifested since the beginning of the twenty-first century. It was originally expressed in the Millennium Development Goals, and in 2015 it took the form of the Global Sustainable Development Goals under the auspices of the United Nations (UN). The book is of particular interest in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis, which accelerates and impacts all aspects of economic activity. In the current emergency, the issue of sustainable development has become more relevant. Any mistakes in digital growth management must be excluded, as they threaten to further destabilization of society and the economy and escalation of the global crisis. This book develops and complements existing works on this topic, being distinguished by the following features, novelty and advantages compared to the existing publications. First, this book forms a systematic idea of the sustainable development of the economy, which embodies all economic entities and offers an appropriate vision of sustainability in relation to each of them. The book considers the sustainable development of not only national economic systems (macro-level aspect of sustainable economic development), but also the world economy (global aspect), the regional economy (inter-level aspect) and enterprises (micro-level aspect). Also, the possible contexts of sustainability of economic systems are most fully taken into account and delineated: developed and developing countries, the pre-digital and digital economy, the phase of recovery in the economic cycle and the phase of recession or crisis. Second, sustainable development is differentiated from economic growth. Their traditional identification prevents the formation of a categorical apparatus of economic science and the determination of the essence of these independent phenomena. The book presents economic growth as a process of development of economic systems without any restrictions—as an end in itself, despite possible negative manifestations. Sustainable development includes socially oriented, that is, responsible, positive economic growth, as well as other manifestations of the v

vi

Introduction: Modern Economy on Its Way to Sustainable Development

progress of economic systems, including innovative activity and corporate responsibility. Sustainability is a moderate development that allows you to maintain the balance of economic systems and avoid crises. Third, a scientific methodology for quantitative change in the sustainability of economic development has been developed, which until then remained their qualitative characteristic. This has opened up more opportunities for empirical research and international comparisons. Relevant indicators of sustainable development and methodological recommendations for their application are proposed to assess the sustainability of the development of economic systems at all levels: from the enterprise to the world economy, taking into account their specifics. The author’s methodological developments were tested on the example of many developed and developing countries, their peculiarities and patterns of sustainable development were revealed. Fourth, a new approach to the scientific study of sustainable economic development has been proposed, involving its “broad interpretation.” The author’s approach is not limited to Global Sustainable Development Goals focused on protecting the environment and improving social indicators—it goes beyond these goals and also includes other manifestations of economic sustainability: stability (ability to withstand crises, continuous economic growth), flexibility and adaptability (in terms of continuous progress, innovation) and balance (social equality, social justice, equitable income distribution). Fifth, the system-wide theory is used as a basis for the study and presentation of the Russia case in the book. This ensures the empirical orientation of the book. Moreover, it allows testing the universality of the developed theory by making it clear how well it fits into the experience of the regional economy of Russia. In addition, the authors provide applied recommendations in the field of support for assessment, focused on Russia. As a result, the book is of interest at both fundamental and applied levels of economic science. The book discusses three basic concepts: 1.

2.

3.

Sustainability—in a broad sense as a combination of (1) overall economic, social and environmental development with minimization of environmental costs of social advance and economic growth, (2) stability and countercyclical (anti-crisis) management of development of economic and social systems, (3) balanced and even development of the regional economy as part of the national economic system; Digital context is a new socioeconomic environment that has developed in an age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution involved with the transition to the digital economy and Industry 4.0 and, in particular, manifested in the accelerated development and wide dissemination of advanced digital technologies; Economic development is a process of evolution of economic and social systems and improvement of their key characteristics, the standard and quality of life of the population being the most important ones.

The book introduces and consistently verifies the hypothesis that the digital context complicates the task and at the same time creates new opportunities for economic development and improved sustainability of modern economic and

Introduction: Modern Economy on Its Way to Sustainable Development

vii

social systems. If the digital context is managed properly, it allows overcoming contradictions and ensuring both economic development and sustainability. The book is logically structured with six thematic parts. The first part forms the conceptual basis for the sustainable development of the modern economy. It formulates the modern scientific paradigm of the sustainable development of the economy and analyzes the contradiction of the sustainable development of the modern economy in the conditions of digitalization—flexibility and innovation are opposed to security and stability. Priorities for the sustainable development of the territory, strategic foundations for the sustainable development of the enterprise are defined, and the concept of state regulation of the economy for sustainable development is developed, as well as the scientific basis for ensuring effective regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations for sustainable development. The chapter reflecting the contradiction of the sustainable development of the modern economy in the conditions of digitalization is of particular interest in this part. It contrasts flexibility and innovation with security and stability. This is clearly demonstrated by the famous dialectics law (in philosophy) the unity and struggle of opposites, which is self-manifested in the contradiction of the ideas of accelerated digital growth and slow crisis-free sustainable development. A scientific and methodological approach that allows overcoming the identified contradiction and combining the goals of digitalization with the goals of sustainable development is proposed. The approach is based on demanding digital innovation and technologies. The second part deals with sustainable economic development. The essence and peculiarities of economic growth management in the interests of sustainable development of the economy are analyzed, and prospects for ensuring the sustainability of territories of advanced socioeconomic development are determined. Eco-oriented economy is considered as an instrument to improve the quality of life in conditions of digitalization. The formation of an effective system of expanded reproduction in agriculture is justified as a necessary condition for the sustainable development of the agricultural sector of the economy. The features of the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises are identified under the conditions of sanctions; infrastructure support is interpreted as the basis for the sustainable development of entrepreneurship and the infrastructure of the digital economy as the basis for the sustainable development of high-tech entrepreneurship. Modernization is interpreted as a condition for the sustainable development of the economy. In this part, the chapter reflecting the basics of managing economic growth for sustainable economic development deserves special attention. It gives a new meaning to the concept of economic from the standpoint of sustainable development. New criteria that economic growth must meet in the era of dominance of sustainable development goals are substantiated: equilibrium of the economy (“green” economic growth), balanced economy (an equal distribution of benefits from economic growth in the society), flexibility and adaptability of the economy (high-tech economic growth) and also economic stability (stable economic growth with minimal variation). The proposed criteria form a guide for making adjustments to economic policies around the world. The criteria follow up the first part and demonstrate the prospects of the practicability of a scientific and methodological approach that allows

viii

Introduction: Modern Economy on Its Way to Sustainable Development

overcoming the contradiction and combining the goals of digitalization with the goals of sustainable development. The third part is devoted to the development of scientific and methodical ensuring sustainable development of economy. The methodology of indicative assessment of the stability of economy development and methodological approach to the assessment of efficiency of management of sustainable development of the economy are proposed. Investment attractiveness is defined as an indicator of the sustainability of the development of the territory in the conditions of digitalization. A system of factors for sustainable economic development is being formed: globalization, diversification and security. The fiscal aspect of ensuring the sustainable development of the region’s economy in modern conditions is being studied. Human capital management is seen as the basis of global mobility for sustainable economic development. Priority areas of human resources for the digital economy for sustainable development are being formulated. With reference to the previous (second) part in this (third) part, the criteria for sustainable economic growth were further developed from a scientific and methodological point of view. In this regard, the chapter on the development and approbation of the methodology for the indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development should be noted. It proposes control intervals (scales) for assigning point values to indicators that meet the criteria of economic development sustainability in 2020. For each criterion of a sustainable economic development (economic equilibrium, sustainable development index, economic stability and economic balance), an estimating indicator is proposed that reflects the quality of conformance for the criterion (coefficient of variation in the rate of economic growth over the past 5 years, the share of deviation of GDP per capita from the leader, flexibility and the adaptability of the economy and the global competitiveness index) as well as a scale for assigning point values to the indicator and their qualitative interpretation. The fourth part justifies the specifics of the sustainable development of various types of socioeconomic systems in modern conditions. The sustainable development of the region and the phenomenon of crisis state of regional economy stability are considered. Models of sustainable development of urban territories and economic mechanism of sustainable development of rural territories in conditions of digitalization are distinguished. Key factors and possibilities of stimulating sustainable development of industrial sectors of the region in conditions of digitalization are identified. The problem of ensuring the sustainable development of the digital enterprise in the face of economic sanctions is formulated and solved. Trends in the development of the labor market in the transition to a digital economy are determined. Following the accepted logic, and developing the scientific results of the previous parts, in this (fourth) part, in the chapter devoted to the development of an economic mechanism for sustainable rural development in the context of digitalization, applied recommendations on meeting the criteria for sustainable digital economic growth and improving their values according to the created scale are represented. The author’s framework recommendations cover the development of digital skills of the population, ensure electronic participation of the population in public administration and the

Introduction: Modern Economy on Its Way to Sustainable Development

ix

development of telecommunications infrastructure (40.49%) along with the property rights protection (37.67%). The fifth part proposes a digital tool for sustainable economic development. The impact of digitalization on economic sustainability in developed and developing countries is being investigated. The institutional framework for the sustainable development of the digital economy and the innovative development of the digital economy from the point of view of sustainability are considered. The peculiarities of organizational and economic management of the digital economy in modern conditions are revealed. The current possibilities and future prospects for public management of sustainable development with the help of big data are justified. The scientific concept of the sustainable development of the country’s territories in the context of the implementation of the digital economy is formulated. A strategic plan to ensure the sustainable development of the digital economy of Russia is proposed. Logically following up on the results previously obtained in this book and enhancing the scientific developments made in the previous parts, in one of the chapters of this part the impact of digitalization on economic sustainability in developed and developing countries is clarified. It identifies the features and offers detailed recommendations for achieving sustainable digital economic growth in developed and developing countries. There were determined exact quantitative prospects for the economic growth rate increasing, GDP per capita, sustainable development index and global competitiveness index 4.0 will decrease by −4.9% through the targeted digital society and knowledge development, digital infrastructure as well as digital business and the state. The sixth part justifies the digital prospects for the sustainable development of the regions of Russia. A methodology for integrated diagnosis and rating of economic security of regions for the sustainable development of their digital economy is proposed. An analysis of the modern methodology for calculating the consumer price index in the Russian Federation and the prospects for the sustainable development of its digital economy is being carried out. The issues of ensuring the economic security of the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union in the interests of sustainable development of their digital economy are being studied. The innovative development of depressed regions for the sustainable development of their digital economy is being evaluated. This part is a logical conclusion of the book, and it summarizes, finalizes the results of the previous parts and provides their practical approbation. The chapter on the issues of economic security of the Eurasian Economic Union countries in view of sustainable development of their digital economy is a highlight in this part. This chapter reveals that cybersecurity is of key importance for the systemic digitalization of the EAEU countries’ economies, makes a significant contribution to import substitution in the digital economy and also substantiates the prospects for the most complete potential disclosure of ICT as a vector of economic growth in the EAEU countries taking into account the key role of cybersecurity in exports of high-technology goods and services. Based on the results obtained, it was concluded that it is necessary to increase the level of cybersecurity in the EAEU countries, to

x

Introduction: Modern Economy on Its Way to Sustainable Development

the benefit of their digital economy’s sustainable development, for that purpose the author’s practical recommendations are proposed. Thus, the book has a clear outline and logic of the research. Each of its parts develops and amends the previous parts, which fully corresponds to the results previously obtained in the book. The book fully covers the problem of sustainable development of the digital economy: from the development of a scientific concept, clarification of criteria and methods of their interpretation up to framework recommendations with the further detailing and approbation using the example of modern economic systems. The main conclusion of the book is that it is necessary to revise the economic policy of managing the digital economy for bringing into accordance with the goals of sustainable development. The concept of digital growth and the approach to achieving it must also be rethought according to the idea of sustainable development. The detailed grounds and applied solutions for this are described in the book. Julia V. Ragulina Doctor of Science, Economics, Professor, RUDN University, Moscow, Russia [email protected] Arutyun A. Khachaturyan Doctor of Science, Economics, Professor, Market Economy Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia [email protected] Arsen S. Abdulkadyrov Doctor of Science, Economics, Professor Dagestan State University of National Economy, Makhachkala, Russia [email protected] Zoya Sh. Babaeva Doctor of Science, Economics, Professor Dagestan State University of National Economy, Makhachkala, Russia [email protected]

Contents

Conceptual Framework for the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy Modern Scientific Paradigm of Sustainable Economic Development . . . . Anna M. Beznebeeva, Anna A. Ilova, and Kometa T. Paytaeva The Contradiction of the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy in the Conditions of Digitalization: Flexibility and Innovation Versus Security and Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrei M. Kushnir, Taisia V. Dianova, and Elena N. Rudakova Priorities of Sustainable Development of the Territory: Ecology, Human Development, Economic Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Svetlana E. Karpushova, Oksana V. Takhumova, and Zalina R. Israilova Strategic Framework for Sustainable Enterprise Development . . . . . . . . . Mannaba G. Rajabova, Razet S.-A. Makkaeva, and Agyad Mahluff

3

13

23 35

Concept of Government Regulation of the Economy for Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Naida D. Dzhabrailova, Liudmila P. Lipatova, and Aza A. Bisultanova

45

Effective Regulation of Entrepreneurs and Their Associations for Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nikolay N. Nadezhin

55

Course for Sustainable Economic Development Managing Economic Growth for Sustainable Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oksana V. Takhumova, Olga N. Muratova, and Zalina R. Israilova Prospects for Ensuring the Sustainability of Territories of Advanced Socio-Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oksana V. Takhumova, Al-Makhzoomi Hassan Mohammed Hassan, and Razet S.-A. Makkaeva

67

77

xi

xii

Contents

Eco-Oriented Economy as a Tool to Improve the Quality of Life: Prospects and Opportunities in the Context of Digitalization . . . . . . . . . . . Elmira K. Salakhova, Mariya V. Grenaderova, and Visita A. Hamzatov Formation of an Effective System of Extended Reproduction in Agriculture as a Prerequisite for the Sustainable Development of the Agricultural Sector of the Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zoya Sh. Babaeva, Vladimir G. Shirobokov, and Sabina S. Ramazanova

87

97

Features of Sustainable Development of Agro-Industrial Enterprises Under Sanctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Patimat D. Kamilova, Zaira M. Kamilova, and Elnara M. Eminova Modernization as a Condition for Sustainable Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Lira K. Gurieva, Uliana S. Borisova, and Kometa T. Paytaeva Scientific and Methodological Support for Sustainable Economic Development Methodology for Indicative Assessment of Sustainability of Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 Ramazan B. Shakhbanov, Natalya V. Sharapova, and Aza A. Bisultanova Methodological Approach to Assessing the Effectiveness of Management of Sustainable Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Zharyat B. Rabadanova, Tatiana P. Satsuk, and Zalina R. Israilova Investment Attractiveness as an Indicator of the Sustainability of the Territory’s Development in the Conditions of Digitalization . . . . . . 149 Uliana S. Borisova, Tatiana N. Shilova, and Razet S.-A. Makkaeva System of Factors for Sustainable Economic Development: Globalization, Diversification, Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 Maxim P. Pridachuk, Nadjivat M. Alieva, and Aza A. Bisultanova Fiscal Aspect of Ensuring Sustainable Development of the Region’s Economy in Modern Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Valentina M. Sharapova, Sabina R. Shakhbanova, and Aza A. Bisultanova Human Capital Management as a Basis for Global Mobility for Sustainable Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 Arsen S. Abdulkadyrov, Irina Y. Eremina, and Alyona V. Chuprova Human Resources Priorities for the Digital Economy for Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 Olga V. Budzinskaya and Nargiz F. Teregulova

Contents

xiii

Specifics of Sustainable Development of Different Types of Socioeconomic Systems in Modern Conditions Sustainable Development of the Region and the Crisis Phenomenon of Regional Economic Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 Sergey V. Dokholyan, Liana E. Kabisova-Komaeva, and Kometa T. Paytaeva Sustainable Urban Development Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 Larisa N. Chizho, Tatyana D. Okuneva, and Gharbawee Mohammed Anwer Hillawi Economic Mechanism for Sustainable Rural Development in the Context of Digitalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 Mikhail A. Babeshin, Olga A. Dmitrieva, and Anton E. Polyakov Sustainable Development of Industrial Spheres in the Region: Key Factors and Opportunities for Incentives in the Context of Digitalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 Evgenii N. Mazhara, Zarema R. Khambulatova, and Alexey V. Garin The Problem of Ensuring the Sustainable Development of the Digital Enterprise in the Context of Economic Sanctions . . . . . . . . 243 Arutyun A. Khachaturyan, Karine S. Khachaturyan, and Stanislav Yu. Evdokimov Labour Market Trends in the Transition to the Digital Economy . . . . . . . 253 Olga V. Budzinskaya and Nargiz F. Teregulova Digital Tools for Sustainable Economic Development Impact of Digitalization on Economic Sustainability in Developed and Developing Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 Viktor Yu. Mishakov, Viktor V. Daitov, and Mikhail S. Gordienko Institutional Framework for the Sustainable Development of the Digital Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 Andrey V. Zhidelev, Leonid A. Zhigun, and Kometa T. Paytaeva Innovative Development of the Digital Economy: A View of Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Zulfiya M. Bikmetova, Viktoriya V. Degtyareva, and Razet S.-A. Makkaeva Peculiarities of Organizational and Economic Management of Digital Economy in Modern Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Viktor A. Splender, Zarema R. Khambulatova, and Mikhail I. Zlydnev State Administration of Sustainable Development Through Big Data: Current Opportunities and Future Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 Elena V. Levinskaya and Anton A. Shirkin

xiv

Contents

Sustainable Development of the Country’s Territories in the Context of the Implementation of the Digital Economy: Management, Innovation, Competitiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 Alexander V. Belov, Valery A. Chevanin, and Kermen A. Pyurveeva Strategic Plan for the Sustainable Development of the Russian Digital Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 Valentina A. Dorzhdeeva, Lyudmila N. Popova, and Zalina R. Israilova The Digital Perspectives of Sustainable Development of Russia’s Regions Development of the Methodology of Complex Diagnostics and Ranking of Regions’ Economic Security for Sustainable Development of Their Digital Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335 Elena V. Karanina and Olesya A. Ryazanova Analysis of the Modern Methodology of Calculating Consumer Price Index in the Russian Federation and the Perspectives of Its Digital Economy’s Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 Natalia D. Vorontsova and Nadezhda V. Palesheva The Issues of Economic Security of the Eurasian Economic Union Countries in View of Sustainable Development of Their Digital Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 Aleksandr N. Timin and Tatiana V. Baybakova Assessment of the Innovative Development of Depressed Regions for the Sustainable Development of Their Digital Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . 359 Vasily M. Karaulov and Marina V. Palkina

Conceptual Framework for the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy

Modern Scientific Paradigm of Sustainable Economic Development Anna M. Beznebeeva, Anna A. Ilova, and Kometa T. Paytaeva

Abstract Purpose: The work is aimed at resolving the contradiction of prerequisites for sustainable development, overcoming the ambiguity of the theoretical base and the multiplicity of interpretations of sustainable development, as well as the it is aimed at formation of the modern scientific paradigm of sustainable economic development. Design/methodology/approach: The authors systematized and classified fundamental approaches to the interpretation of the sustainable development of the economy, simulated the development of the economy from the perspective of various fundamental approaches to its sustainability (for the t period). An optimization approach has been formed, according to which both state regulation and market self-government together served as the reasons for the formation of the concept of sustainable development of the modern economy and where both have contributed to its institutionalization. The proposed approach acts as the theoretical and methodological basis of this research. Findings: The modern scientific paradigm of sustainable economic development has been formed, which simultaneously ensures compliance with all the identified criteria through the pyramid (hierarchical) interpretation of economic development, which is based on the environment and the fight against climate change; at the center is the social environment and at the top is economic growth. It also achieves multifactorial and flexible correlation of traditions and innovations presented in the form of weights, and it achieves mutual support of structural elements within the economic system. Originality/value: The modern scientific paradigm of the sustainable development of the economy is justified, which is based on the proposed fundamental optimization approach to the interpretation of the A. M. Beznebeeva (B) Volgograd State Academy of Physical Culture, Volgograd, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A. A. Ilova Branch “Rise” of the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Moscow Aviation Institute (National Research University)”, Akhtubinsk, Russia e-mail: [email protected] K. T. Paytaeva Institute of Economics and Finance, Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_1

3

4

A. M. Beznebeeva et al.

sustainability of the economy as a priority for its development. From the perspective of the optimization approach, the criteria for sustainable development, which provides an expanded interpretation of sustainable development, were systematized, which includes balance, stability, balance, flexibility and adaptability. The research contributes to the development of the concept of sustainable economic development by clarifying its fundamental principles. Keywords Scientific paradigm · Sustainable economic development · Balance · Stability · Equilibrium · Flexibility and adaptability · Economic growth · Innovative development · Environmental protection · Fight against climate change JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Sustainable development over the past two decades has formed the conceptual basis of the modern economy. Nevertheless, the scientific paradigm of sustainable development is still not formed due to fundamental contradictions, the reason for which is the uncertainty of the etymology and causal relationships of sustainable development. International (supernational) governance measures and their public regulation of the economy could be a prerequisite for launching sustainable development. Therefore, the adoption of the Millennium Development Goals in 2000 and its successor global sustainable development goals, adopted in 2015 under the auspices of the UN, have contributed to the inclusion of sustainability requirements in national economic development strategies and the subsequent transformation of the market environment under pressure from government regulation. In this case, the unprepared social and entrepreneurial environment can cause public and business protests against sustainability requirements. Another precondition for sustainable development could be the pre-emergence of social and business ground, which prompted for the subsequent adoption of sustainable development goals. It assumes a direct procedure for the formation of an institution of sustainable development. Raising the level of social creation and modernization of business culture contributed to the development of practices of responsible production and consumption. In response, a legal and regulatory framework for sustainable development was established. Despite the existence of convincing arguments in favor of each of the above points of view, the existing factual data is not enough to clearly prove one of them and refute the other point of view. The ambiguity of the theoretical framework causes multiple interpretations of sustainable development, which impedes its paradigm definition and causes a fragmentation of scientific knowledge in the field of sustainable development. This work, aimed at shaping the modern scientific paradigm of sustainable economic development, is designed to resolve this contradiction.

Modern Scientific Paradigm of Sustainable Economic Development

5

2 Materials and Method As a result of a literary review on a given topic, this work defines fundamental approaches to the interpretation of the sustainable development of the economy, the author’s classification (according to the criterion of the causal relationships of sustainable development) and the comparative characteristics of which are given in Table 1. As it can be seen from Table 1, the regulatory approach treats sustainability as a limitation of economic development. The impact of sustainable economic development is linked to slowing economic growth and innovation in favour of environmental protection. The mechanism for ensuring sustainable development is government regulation: planning, standardization, licensing, rationing. This approach is presented in the works of Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Inshakov et al. (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Popkova (2017a, b, 2019), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2017), Popkova and Gulzat (2020), Popkova and Sergi (2019), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi et al. (2019a, b), Sergi (2018), Shulus et al. (2020), Lukianenko (2017), Borodin and Morozova (2017). In contrast, a competitive approach defines sustainability as a vector of economic development. The impact of sustainable economic development is linked to investment in sustainable development through corporate responsibility and Table 1 Fundamental approaches to the interpretation of sustainable economic development Approach

Interpretation of sustainable economic development

Impact of sustainable economic development

Mechanism for sustainable development

Representatives of the approach

Regulatory approach

Sustainability as a constraint on economic development

Slowing economic growth and innovation to protect the environment

Government regulation: planning, standardization, licensing, rationing

E. G. Popkova, B. S. Sergi et al.

Competitive approach

Sustainability as a vector of economic development

Investment in sustainable development in corporate responsibility and public social programmes

Market self-government: competition in industry markets, development of consumer consciousness

Y. V. Ragulina, D. Zhang et al.

Optimization approach

Sustainability as a priority for economic development

Maximizing Economic Efficiency through Systemic Benefits and Cost Limitation

Scientific and technological progress, rationalization of decision-making

A new approach proposed by the authors of this research

Source A new approach proposed by the authors of this research

6

A. M. Beznebeeva et al.

public social programmes. The mechanism for ensuring sustainable development is market self-government: competition in industry markets, the development of consumer consciousness. This approach is described in the works of Abdelhalim and Eldin (2019), Andronova et al. (2019), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Haabazoka (2019), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018a, b), Zhang et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, 2020b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017a, b), Popkova et al. (2020). In such a way, the existence of two opposite fundamental approaches does not allow us to form a single and holistic modern scientific paradigm for the sustainable development of the economy. Based on the scientific reasoning of both the above fundamental approaches, an optimization approach was formed on their basis, according to which both state regulation and market self-government together served as the reasons (prerequisites) for the formation of the concept of sustainable development of the modern economy and where both contributed to its institutionalization (practical implementation of the concept). The optimization approach treats sustainability as a priority for economic development. The effects of sustainable economic development are linked to maximizing economic efficiency through systemic advantages and cost constraints. The mechanism for ensuring sustainable development is scientific and technological progress, which ensures the rationalization of decision-making and contributes to the improvement of both government regulation and market self-government. The proposed approach acts as the theoretical and methodological basis of this research.

3 Results In order to clearly demonstrate the specifics of the developed optimization approach in Fig. 1, models of economic development are compiled from the perspective of various fundamental approaches to its sustainability (for an equal period t in all cases). As it can be seen from Fig. 1, the regulatory approach assumes that over the t period the economy develops by g. Its further development is hampered by constraints on sustainability, in the absence of which it could be continued. The cost of economic development is c. The competitive approach assumes that in addition to this (to unsustainable development) over the period t, the economy develops in a different direction (sustainable development) by a similar amount g, but with lower costs (c − α). The optimization approach assumes that instead of all this, the economy for the period t develops by a large amount g + λ with lower costs (c − (α + β)). An additional advantage of the optimization approach is an expanded interpretation of sustainable development from the perspective of not one (environmental protection), but four criteria described in Table 2. As it can be seen from Table 2, one of the criteria is economic equilibrium. It means equivalence, systemic consideration of the interests of economic growth and

Modern Scientific Paradigm of Sustainable Economic Development

7

Expenses of economic development Restrictions on stability Regulatory approach

c

economic development over the t period

c-α

Competitive approach additional (parallel) sustainable economic development over the t period

Economy c-(α+β)

alternative - sustainable economic development for the t period g

Optimization approach

g+λ

Level of Economy development

Fig. 1 Models of economic development from the perspective of various fundamental approaches to its sustainability (for the t period). Source Developed and compiled by the authors

entrepreneurship, society (population) and environmental conservation (combating climate change), the future orientation of development. The instrument for the development of the economy in accordance with this criterion is the green economy, corporate responsibility (responsible production) and responsible consumption. Another criterion is related to the stability of the economy. It means continuous development, maintaining the progress made, guaranteeing the level and quality of life, and the ability of the economy to withstand crises. The instrument for the development of the economy in accordance with this criterion is economic crisis management (risk insurance, accumulation of reserves, etc.). The criteria also includes the balance of the economy. It means the current proportionality and uniformity of the development of the structural elements of the economic system. The tool for economic development in accordance with this criterion at the regional level is: fiscal federalism; at the global level: support for developing (falling behind) countries. Another criterion is the flexibility and adaptability of the economy. It means the moderation of tradition and innovation in the development of the economy and its ability to progress, the ability to adapt to changes in the internal and external environment. The tools for the development of the economy in accordance with this criterion are socially oriented innovations and diversification of economic activities. Based on the proposed criteria, a modern scientific paradigm of sustainable economic development has been compiled (Fig. 2). As it is shown in Fig. 2, the modern scientific paradigm of sustainable economic development ensures the simultaneous observance of all the identified criteria through the pyramid (hierarchical) interpretation of economic development, which is based

8

A. M. Beznebeeva et al.

Table 2 Criteria for sustainable development from the perspective of an optimization approach that provides an expanded interpretation of sustainable development Criterion for sustainable economic development

Entity and logic of criterion application

Tool for economic development in accordance with the criterion

Sustainability as economic equilibrium

Equivalence, systemic consideration of the interests of economic growth and entrepreneurship, society (population) and environmental conservation (combating climate change), future orientation of development

Green economy, corporate responsibility (responsible production) and responsible consumption

Sustainability as Economic Continuous development, Stability maintaining the progress achieved, guaranteeing the level and quality of life, the ability of the economy to withstand crises

Economic crisis management (risk insurance, accumulation of reserves, etc.)

Sustainability as a balanced Current proportionality and economy uniformity of development of structural elements of the economic system

At the regional level: fiscal federalism At the global level: support for developing (falling behind) countries

Sustainability as Flexibility Moderation of traditions and and Adaptability innovations in the development of the economy and its ability to progress, the ability to adapt to changes in the internal and external environment

Social-oriented innovations, diversification of economic activities

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

on the environment and the fight against climate change; at the center—the social environment and at the top—economic growth. It also achieves multifactorial and flexible correlation of traditions and innovations presented in the form of weights, and mutual support of structural elements within the economic system.

4 Conclusion Thus, the study justified the modern scientific paradigm of sustainable economic development, which is based on the proposed optimization fundamental approach to interpreting the sustainability of the economy as a priority for its development. The criteria for sustainable development are systematized from the perspective of an optimization approach that provides an expanded interpretation of sustainable development, which includes balance, stability, equilibrium, flexibility and adaptability.

Another structural element of the economic system (region or national economy)

Modern Scientific Paradigm of Sustainable Economic Development

9

The State (public administration) economic crisis management mutual support

requirements for social orientation

Stability

Economic growth

Balance Equilibrium

Social environment Environment

Innovations Traditions Flexibility and adaptability Market requirements, competition

Mechanism for sustainable development: scientific and technological progress

Fig. 2 Modern scientific paradigm of sustainable economic development. Source Developed and compiled by the authors

The research contributes to the development of the concept of sustainable economic development by clarifying its fundamental principle.

References Abdelhalim K, Eldin A (2019) Can CSR help achieve sustainable development? Applying a new assessment model to CSR cases from Egypt. Int J Sociol Soc Policy 39(9/10):773–795. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-06-2019-0120 Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Starostin VS, Degtereva (2019) Study of sector-specific innovation efforts: the case from Russian economy. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship Sustain Center 7(1):540–552 Borodin IP, Morozova IA (2017) Development of CSR development applications using the example of OJSC MTS. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XIII All-Russian electronic

10

A. M. Beznebeeva et al.

scientific and practical conference “Green economy as a practical vector of sustainable development”. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/52-2017-xiii/568-razrabotka-predlozhe nij-po-razvitiyu-kso-na-primere-oao-mts (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (eds) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham. Online ISBN 978-3-030-00102-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC. USA, Information Age Publishing Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 44, pp 135–148 Lukianenko NA (2017) Top problems of health-tourism development. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XIII All-Russian electronic scientific and practical conference “Green economy as a practical vector of sustainable development”. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017goda/52-2017-xiii/567-aktualnye-problemy-razvitiya-ozdorovitelnogo-turizma (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 15(2):589–597 Popkova EG (2017a) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova ZV (2017b) Marketing in the activities of personnel structures. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XVI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “Marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions”. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/570-mar keting-v-deyatelnosti-kadrovykh-struktur (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Popkova EG (2019) Preconditions of formation and development of industry 4.0 in the conditions of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169(1):65–72 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020) Technological revolution in the 21st century: digital society versus artificial intelligence. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 91, pp. 339–345 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety versus rationality. Springer International Publishing Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Petrenko E, Pizikov S, Mukaliev N, Mukazhan A (2018a) Impact of production and transaction costs on companies’ performance according assessments of experts. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(1):398–410. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.1(24) Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018b) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Issues 7(4):781–791. https://www.researchg ate.net/publication/326001978_Sustainable_developmet_processes_Service_sector_in_post-ind ustrial_economy Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing

Modern Scientific Paradigm of Sustainable Economic Development

11

Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019) Top-priority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Sozinova AA, Fetisova OV (2019a) Modeling Russian industrial, tech, and financial cooperation with the asia-pacific region. In: Sergi BS (ed) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, pp 195–223 Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019b) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 92, pp 353–359 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63 Zhang D, Wang C, Zheng D, Yu X (2018) Process of innovation knowledge increase in supply chain network from the perspective of sustainable development. Ind Manag Data Syst 118(4):873–888. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-06-2017-0243

The Contradiction of the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy in the Conditions of Digitalization: Flexibility and Innovation Versus Security and Stability Andrei M. Kushnir, Taisia V. Dianova, and Elena N. Rudakova Abstract Purpose: The purpose of the research is to study the essence of the contradiction between the sustainable and innovative development of the modern economy, as well as the nature of the influence on it and the prospects for its resolution in the conditions of digitalization. Design/methodology/approach: The authors rely on an expanded interpretation of sustainable development. For each of the criteria for sustainable development, as well as for the criteria for digitalization, assessment indicators are selected that reflect the degree of compliance with the criterion, sources of statistics and countries that best meet the selected criteria. The research was carried out using the correlation analysis method based on data for 2020. Findings: Crosscorrelation of indicators of sustainable development with indicators of innovation and digitalization is calculated. It was revealed that in 2020, when the expressed results of digitalization of the economy have already been achieved, there is a positive connection between digital and non-digital innovations and sustainable development (more than 60% for all indicators). Originality/value: It has been proved that in the context of digitalization, the contradiction of sustainable development is overcome due to the contrast between flexibility, innovativeness and security, stability. Through digitalization, innovation is being transformed from a barrier to sustainable development to a mechanism to facilitate it. The study formed the scientific basis for the development of a progressive approach to public administration of sustainable development in a new—digital context, based on innovation as a source of moderate risk and a catalyst for the development of economic systems. Keywords Contradiction · Sustainable development · Modern economy · Digitalization · Flexibility · Innovation · Security · Stability A. M. Kushnir (B) · E. N. Rudakova Russian University of Transport (RUT-MIIT), Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] E. N. Rudakova e-mail: [email protected] T. V. Dianova Moscow State Institute of International Relations, Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_2

13

14

A. M. Kushnir et al.

JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Sustainable development, identified with stability and tradition, has traditionally been contrasted with innovation associated with change and therefore taking the economy out of its current equilibrium. From the point of view of the Theory of Systems, innovation creates an economic system into a state of bifurcation (change of status quo, uncertainty), the exit from which is variable and can be associated both with improving the socio-economic and environmental situation of the economic system (rise) and its deterioration (crisis). Because of the high risk associated with innovation, they are often interpreted negatively and criticized from the standpoint of economic sustainability. This raises a serious scientific and practical problem, since without flexibility and innovation, development as such is difficult or even impossible, but, at the same time, security and stability are the priorities of modern economic systems. The solution to this problem through innovation risk management measures has not been achieved, as it does not change the essence of innovation. Digitalization marked a new era of innovative development of economic systems. In particular, opportunities for green innovation have increased, as well as the availability of innovation to developing countries and lagging regions in national economies. In this regard, it is relevant to study the impact of innovation on the stability of the economy in a new—digital context that changes their essence. The working hypothesis of this study is that digitalization can overcome the contradiction between the flexibility and stability of the economy in the process of its innovative development by reducing the risks of innovation. The purpose of the work is to study the essence of the contradiction between the sustainable and innovative development of the modern economy, as well as the nature of the influence on it and the prospects for its resolution in the conditions of digitalization.

2 Materials and Method In general, the degree of study of the problem of this study can be defined as high. Stability and security as manifestations of sustainable development are outlined in the works Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka (2019), Inshakov et al. (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2020), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi et al. (2019a), Sergi (2018), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017, 2020a, b), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017a, b). Innovations and their impact on sustainable economic development are analyzed in the works Andronova et al. (2019), Bili´nska-Reformat et al. (2019), Popkova et al. (2017), Zhang et al. (2018). Digitalization of economy is studied in Shulus et al. (2020), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Popkova (2017a, b, 2019), Popkova and Gulzat (2020a, b), Popkova and Zmiyak (2019), Popkova and Sergi

The Contradiction of the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy …

15

Table 1 Criteria for sustainable development and digitalization and their respective assessment indicators Criterion for assessing the development of the economy

Evaluation indicator showing the degree of compliance with the criterion

Source of statistical data for indicator measurement

Criteria for sustainable economic development

Economy equilibrium

index of sustainable development

United Nations Denmark, Development Sweden, Finland Program (UNDP)

Stability of economy

Rate of variation in economic growth over the past 5 years

International Bhutan, Monetary Fund Mongolia, India (IMF)

Balance of economy

GDP per capita deviation from leader

International Luxembourg, Monetary Fund Switzerland, (IMF) Iceland

Flexibility and Index of global adaptability of the competitiveness economy

Criteria of digitalization

World Economic Forum (WEF)

Current, 2020 Top 3 countries in the global ranking

Singapore, USA, Netherlands

Index of quality of Number life

Denmark, Switzerland, Finland

Innovative development

Index of innovative development

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

Switzerland, Sweden, USA

Digital competitiveness

Index of digital competitiveness

International Institute for Management Development (IMD)

USA, Singapore, Sweden

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

(2019, 2020), Sergi et al. (2019b), Sergi (2019), Lukyanenko (2017), Borodin and Morozova (2017). Nevertheless, the contradiction of the sustainable development of the modern economy in the conditions of digitalization is not studied sufficiently. To fill this gap in our work, we rely on the extended interpretation of sustainable development given in the previous Chap. 1 of this book, according to which four criteria for sustainability are identified: balance, stability, balance, flexibility/adaptability. For each of these criteria, as well as for the digitalization criteria, assessment indicators reflecting the degree of compliance with the criterion, sources of statistical data and countries that best meet the selected criteria have been selected (Table 3).

16

A. M. Kushnir et al.

Table 2 Indicators of digitalization and sustainable development according to the criterion of equilibrium and flexibility/adaptability in 2020 (based on the results of 2019) Country

Digital competency index, points 1–100

Global competitiveness index, score 1–100

Innovation index, points 1–100

Quality of life index, points 1–200

Sustainable development index, points 1–100

Bhutan

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

67.6

Denmark

95.225

81.2

58.44

196.47

85.2

India

64.952

61.4

36.58

115.41

61.1

Iceland

79.935

74.7

51.53

188.12

79.2

Luxembourg

84.368

77.0

53.47

n/a

74.8

Mongolia

49.846

52.6

36.29

n/a

64.7

Netherlands

94.261

82.4

61.44

186.41

80.4

Russia

70.406

66.7

37.62

104.05

70.9

Singapore

99.373

84.8

58.37

146.09

69.6

USA

100.000

83.7

61.73

176.77

74.5

Finland

93.732

80.2

59.83

195.06

82.8

Switzerland

94.648

82.3

67.24

196.08

78.8

Sweden

96.070

81.2

63.65

180.52

85.0

Source Compiled by the authors based on Institute of Scientific Communications (2020)

Based on the data of Table 1, a certain selection of the study was determined, which included all countries in the top 3 for each of the selected indicators (Table 2). The research is carried out using the correlation analysis method, which determines the relationship (cross-correlation) of digitalization indicators and indicators of sustainable economic development.

3 Results On the basis of statistics from Table 3, a cross-correlation of indicators of sustainable development with indicators of innovation and digitalization is calculated, which is shown graphically in Fig. 1. As it can be seen from Fig. 1, in 2020, when the marked results of the digitalization of the economy have already been achieved, there is a positive connection between digital and non-digital innovations and sustainable development. The Global Competitiveness Index 4.0 shows the greatest correlation with the Digital Competitiveness Index (99.19%) and the Innovation Index (92.86%). The quality of life index is also closely related to the digital competitiveness index (72.16%) and the innovation index (85.27%).

2.144 1.400

6.828

7.200

3.981

0.976

2.095

−0.248

Iceland

Luxembourg

Mongolia

Netherlands

3.310

Sweden

2.696

1.429

1.345

2.307

2.249

2.380

1.605

1.401

2.519

2.555

1.444

2.181

1.600

1.511

2.121

2.553

1.500

1.732

8.073

3.308

3.225

7.791

1.801

13.736

1.697

1.700

1.518

1.825

2.552

1.500

1.682

5.340

3.087

3.114

7.921

1.873

8.444

Source Compiled and calculated by authors based on International Monetary Fund (2020)

1.387

1.310

Switzerland

1.616

USA

Finland

1.996

Singapore

1.821 1.840

3.529

3.744

3.639

7.685

1.701

11.210

−0.216

5.695

7.179

1.474

1.137

India

5.891

Denmark

Russia

GDP per capita

24.50

10.24

5.43

17.46

10.60

68.39

11.08

106.98

9.96

39.38

6.16

18.66

36.80

55,035.852

80,838.725

46,478.320

66,194.406

54,735.908

11,980.732

48,326.395

3,838.704

109,736.752

81,102.930

2,357.693

57,306.962

3,960.946

2017 (%) 2018 (%) 2019 (%) 2020 (%) Variability (%) 2020 ($)

6.234

2016 (%)

Rate of economic growth

Bhutan

Country

0.50

0.74

0.42

0.60

0.50

0.11

0.44

0.03

1.00

0.74

0.02

0.52

0.04

Share of leader (Luxembourg) (%)

Table 3 Indicators of digitalization according to the criterion of stability and balance in 2020 (according to the results of 2019)

The Contradiction of the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy … 17

18

A. M. Kushnir et al.

120.00 100.00 80.00

99.19

92.86

85.27 72.16

70.52

77.25 63.51 Variability coeficient in economic growth over the past 5 years

60.00 40.00 20.00

-74.93 -64.70

0.00 Global Index of Competitiveness quality of life Index -40.00 -20.00

69.71

Index of sustainable development

Percentage of GDP deviation per capita from leader

-60.00 -80.00 -100.00 correlation with digital competitiveness index

correlation with innovation index

Fig. 1 Cross-correlation of sustainability indicators with innovation and digitalization indicators, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

The cross-correlation of the sustainable development index with the digital competitiveness index is 70.52% and with the innovation index 77.25%. The coefficient of variation in economic growth over the past 5 years shows a negative correlation, which with the digital competitiveness index is −74.93% and with the innovation index −64.70%. The share of GDP deviation per capita from the leader is also closely related to the digital competitiveness index (63.51%) and the innovation index (69.71%). The results show the transformation of the contradiction of the sustainable development of the modern economy in the context of digitalization, which is reflected in the model of the economic cycle in Fig. 2. Prior to digitalization, as shown in Fig. 2, innovation was a source of risk and a choice was made between innovation and stability. Innovation, while generally increasing the level of development of economic systems (economic, social and environmental), caused crises and widened the gap between developed and developing countries. The exact calendar year in which digitalization occurred is shown in Fig. 2 because it cannot be unambiguously defined—in some countries there have already been visible successes in the field of digitalization, and other countries are only launching national digital modernization programs. After digitalization, innovation becomes a source of development, a choice is made between non-digital and digital innovations, while stability ceases to be an independent alternative and does not contradict innovation. Innovation in the context of digitalization is accelerating the pace of economic development and narrowing the

The Contradiction of the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy …

Level of developm Innovation as a source of risk

19

the choice between non-digital and digital innovation Developed countries Developing countries

… … the choice between innovation and stability

Innovation as a source of development Timeframe 7

before digitalization

after digitalization

Fig. 2 Transformation of the contradiction of the sustainable development of the modern economy in the conditions of digitalization in the model of the economic cycle. Source Developed and compiled by the authors

gap between developed and developing countries. Therefore, innovation is becoming a mechanism for sustainable development.

4 Conclusion Therefore, the results of the study showed that in the context of digitalization, the contradiction between flexibility, innovativeness and security, stability and sustainable development is overcome. Through digitalization, innovation is being transformed from a barrier to sustainable development to a mechanism to facilitate it. In such a way, in a new digital context, a progressive approach to public administration of sustainable development, based on innovation as a source of moderate risk and a catalyst for the development of economic systems, is becoming available and needs to be further developed. Further research is recommended to develop this approach.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27

20

A. M. Kushnir et al.

Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Starostin VS, Degtereva (2019) Study of sector-specific innovation efforts: the case from Russian economy. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship Sustain Center 7(1):540–552 Bili´nska-Reformat K, Kucharska B, Twardzik M, Dolega L (2019) Sustainable development concept and creation of innovative business models by retail chains. Int J Retail Distrib Manag 47(1):2–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2017-0071 Borodin IP, Morozova IA (2017) Development of CSR development applications using the example of OJSC “MTS”. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XIII All-Russian electronic scientific and practical conference “green” economy s a practical vector of sustainable development. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/52-2017-xiii/568-razrabotka-predlozhenijpo-razvitiyu-kso-na-primere-oao-mts (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of Elinor Ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (ed) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham. Online ISBN 978-3-030-00102-5, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 44, pp. 135–148 Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020”. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set (data accessed: 22.04.2020) International Monetary Fund (2020) World economic outlook database. https://www.imf.org/ext ernal/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/weoselgr.aspx (data accessed: 22.04.2020) Lukyanenko NA (2017) Advanced topics of health tourism development. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XIII All-Russian electronic scientific and practical conference “green” economics as a practical vector of sustainable development. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017goda/52-2017-xiii/567-aktualnye-problemy-razvitiya-ozdorovitelnogo-turizma (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 15(2):589–597 Popkova EG (2017a) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova ZV (2017b) Marketing in the activities of personnel structures. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XVI all-russian electronic seminar-conference marketing AND PR: new tools

The Contradiction of the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy …

21

and practical solutions. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/570-market ing-v-deyatelnosti-kadrovykh-struktur (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Popkova EG (2019) Preconditions of formation and development of industry 4.0 in the conditions of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Dec Control 169(1):65–72 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020a) Technological revolution in the 21st century: digital society versus artificial intelligence. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 91, pp 339–345 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020b) Contradiction of the digital economy: public well-being versus cyber threats. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 87, pp 112–124 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety versus rationality. Springer International Publishing Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human capital and AI in industry 4.0. Convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. J Intellect Capital 21(4):565–581. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JIC-09-2019-0224 Popkova EG, Zmiyak KV (2019) Priorities of training of digital personnel for industry 4.0: social competencies versus technical competencies. Horizon 27(3–4):138–144 Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Dec Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Dec Control 169:235– 244 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Bogoviz AV, Litvinova TN (2019a) Understanding industry 4.0: AI, the internet of things, and the future of work. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019b) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 92, pp 353–359 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63 Zhang D, Wang C, Zheng D, Yu X (2018) Process of innovation knowledge increase in supply chain network from the perspective of sustainable development. Ind Manag Data Syst 118(4):873–888. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-06-2017-0243

Priorities of Sustainable Development of the Territory: Ecology, Human Development, Economic Security Svetlana E. Karpushova , Oksana V. Takhumova , and Zalina R. Israilova

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of the work is to determine the priorities and prospects of state regulation of the sustainable development of territories (regions) in modern Russia. Design/methodology/approach: The methodology of this research is based on the correlation analysis method. It identifies the contribution to the sustainable development of the territory of potential factors that are amenable to direct public administration: digitalization, innovation and the costs of the regional budget. The research is conducted using the example of regions with great development potential in 2020. Findings: For each of the priorities of the sustainable development of the Territory, the indicators characterizing it are being determined. The Gini index is used for human development, labor market tensions, the standard of living of the population and the level of education. For economic security, this is the regional budget balance, the balanced financial result of enterprises, GRP per capita and economic growth. For ecology, this is an ecological index, since it most fully reflects the state of the environment in the region. The cross-correlation of these indicators with the factors of sustainable development of the territory is calculated. Originality/value: It is justified that the key factor for the sustainable development of the Territory is the share of innovative enterprises (the total correlation with the manifestations of sustainable development was 384.59). Also a significant factor is digitalization (302.92) and the share of innovative products (232.12). Less significant factors are investments in fixed assets (156.15) and the share of expenditures on socio-cultural activities in the structure of expenditures of the regional budget (126.28). The most manageable manifestation of sustainable development through influence on these factors is the regional budget balance, the level of education and the standard of S. E. Karpushova (B) Sebryakovsky Branch of Volgograd State Technical University, Volgograd, Russia O. V. Takhumova Kuban State Agrarian University Named After I.T. Trubilin, Krasnodar, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Z. R. Israilova Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_3

23

24

S. E. Karpushova et al.

living of the population. Ecology is the least managed manifestation of sustainable development. Keywords Priorities · Sustainable development · Territory · Ecology · Human development · Economic security · Regions of Russia JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Sustainable development is a universal characteristic of any economic system. The most common interpretation comes from the perspective of the sustainable development of the world economy and national economic systems. This is due to the enlargement of world market players in the context of globalization. However, the impact of globalization on the economy is controversial and manageable. In those countries where natural regionalization is strongly expressed (there are clear differences in the geographical and socio-economic situation of the regions) and measures are applied to limit the influence of globalization (customs regulation, preservation of local culture), the regions retain a high degree of independence. This explains the relevance of studying the sustainable development of the territory as a meso-level economic system. Unlike the national economy, the sustainable development of the territory does not imply an assessment of the balance of its structural elements (districts), but assesses social justice and the proportionality of income distribution. Therefore, the sustainability of the development of the territory is assessed not according to four (as a national economy), but according to three criteria. The first criterion is ecology, the state of the environment, the manifestation of climate change and the environmental consequences of economic growth and development of the territory. The second criterion is human development, which comprehensively reflects the socio-economic situation of the region. The third criterion is economic security which comes as the region’s ability to withstand threats of various nature. While the criteria for sustainable development of the Territory are known, there remains uncertainty as to what factors affect the extent to which the region meets these criteria, to what extent these factors are manageable, and to what extent compliance with each criterion can be achieved through regulation. This study is intended to fill these gaps. A striking example of a country with a high degree of regionalization of the economy is Russia. Therefore, the purpose of the work is to determine the priorities and prospects of state regulation of the sustainable development of territories (regions) in modern Russia.

Priorities of Sustainable Development of the Territory …

25

2 Materials and Method The priorities for sustainable development of the Territory—ecology, human development, economic security—are clearly defined and given in detail in the follwoing existing publications Andronova et al. (2019), Avery (2018), Chalhoub (2018), Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka (2019), Inshakov et al. (2019), Lawanda (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2003, 2018, 2019), Sergi et al. (2019), Tripathi et al. (2020), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Lukianenko (2017), Borodin and Morozova (2017), Popkova (2017a, b), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017, 2020a, b), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova et al. (2020). To the contrary, the methodological basis for the criterion assessment of the sustainable development of the territory has not been formed and there is still no scientific image of the prospects for its state regulation. The methodology of this research is based on the correlation analysis method. It identifies the contribution to the sustainable development of the territory of potential factors that are amenable to direct public administration: digitalization, innovation and the costs of the regional budget. The research is conducted on an example of regions with great potential to development emphasized in the Data Set “Interactive Statistics and Intelligent Analytics of the Balanced State of the Regional Economy of Russia in Terms of Big Data and Blockchain—2020” of The Institute of Science Statistics on the selected factors in 2020 (according to the results of 2019) are given in Table 1. For each of the priorities of the sustainable development of the Territory, the indicators characterizing it are determined. For human development, this is the Gini index, labor market tensions, the standard of living of the population and the level of education. For economic security, this is the regional budget balance, the balanced financial result of enterprises, GRP per capita and economic growth. For ecology, it is an ecological index, since it most fully reflects the state of the environment in the region. Statistics on the manifestations of sustainable development of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020 are given in Table 2.

3 Results Based on the data from Tables 1 and 2, the following correlation analysis results are obtained (Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5). In Fig. 1, since the lower the Gini coefficient, the better, and its correlation with digitalization is positive, the positive effect is not being achieved. Similarly, the negative correlation of digitalization with the environmental index indicates the impossibility of managing this manifestation of sustainable development through digitalization. The sum of all correlation coefficients indicating the positive impact

51.28

65.16

60.41

43.26

58.11

53.30

63.22

50.24

9.09

62.19

The Astrakhan Region

The Belgorod Region

The Chelyabinsk Region

The Ivanovo Region

The Kaluga Region

The Krasnodar Territory

The Lipetsk Region

The Primorsky Territory

The Smolensk Region

The Voronezh Region

6.50

4.76

0.50

7.33

47.25

2.70

0.20

32.32

13.78

0.17

Share of innovative products (%)

11.92

5.76

5.16

17.11

21.92

10.10

5.36

13.00

16.31

5.54

Share of innovatively active organizations (%)

149,081.17

58,273.85

61,484.23

146,347.56

105,197.03

74,063.82

27,588.06

53,648.11

84,274.23

210,948.18

Investments in fixed assets per capita, rubles

108,403.9

45,078.1

119,316.0

63,423.4

279,425.2

67,933.5

39,831.5

170,696.2

95,658.4

41,910.3

Expenses (total) of the regional budget, million rubles

69,207.4

28,225.4

70,743.4

38,164.2

189,533.4

36,101.4

26,158.2

124,847.8

53,411.8

27,969.5

mln. pyb

63.84

62.61

59.29

60.17

67.83

53.14

65.67

73.14

55.84

66.74

%

Expenditure on socio-cultural activities

Source Compiled and calculated by the authors on the basis of materials from the Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), Rosstat (2020)

Digitalization level, points 1–100

Territory (region)

Table 1 Sustainable development factors of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020

26 S. E. Karpushova et al.

0.362

0.393

0.351

0.362

0.364

0.404

0.389

0.380

0.382

The Belgorod Region

The Chelyabinsk Region

The Ivanovo Region

The Kaluga Region

The Krasnodar Region

The Lipetsk Region

The Primorsky Region

The Smolensk Region

4.7

0.8

2.3

3.2

2.3

3.2

5.3

1.5

5.5

1.74

1.98

2.27

2.20

1.97

1.73

1.80

2.36

1.63

5.9

13.0

6.2

30.3

5.1

6.9

25.8

12.5

8.2

4817.74

4608.26

6844.19

58,027.18

8965.20

803.31

23,701.78

14,325.44

10,602.01

Regional budget balance, million rubles

7509.42

29,434.20

1,588,224.82

134,011.17

90,283.85

1499.79

154,218.52

56,852.75

55,264.70

Balance of business, million rubles

Economy security Admission to universities, thousands of people

Gini coefficient (less is better)

Labour market Standard of strains ratio living of the (less is better) population*

Human development

The Astrakhan Region

Territory (region)

Table 2 Manifestations of sustainable development of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020

328,151.00

481,048.00

553,157.00

424,724.00

454,969.00

222,995.00

516,606.00

600,785.00

407,557.00

GRP per capita, rubles

57

−3.6

47

54

−2.3

−2.3

(continued)

51

58

1.6

0.1

59

40

−3.1

2.7

63

53

Ecological index (%)

Ecology

3.4

2.8

Economic growth (%)

Priorities of Sustainable Development of the Territory … 27

0.399

1.9

2.18

22.2

16,504.92

Regional budget balance, million rubles 4392.77

Balance of business, million rubles

Economy security Admission to universities, thousands of people

Gini coefficient (less is better)

Labour market Standard of strains ratio living of the (less is better) population*

Human development

470,003.00

GRP per capita, rubles

1.4

Economic growth (%)

52

Ecological index (%)

Ecology

of monetary income of the population to the value of a fixed set of consumer goods and services according to the results of 2017 Source Green patrol (2020), Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), RiaRating (2020), Rosstat (2020) is compiled by authors on the basis of materials

* Ratio

The Voronezh Region

Territory (region)

Table 2 (continued)

28 S. E. Karpushova et al.

Priorities of Sustainable Development of the Territory … Economic and Environmental Index Economic growth GRP per capita Business Balance Regional budget balance University admissions Standard of living of the population Labour market tension ratio Gini coefficient -60.00

-40.00

-20.00

29 -3.41 50.55 68.38 29.18 24.07 33.49 57.36

-39.88 8.80

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

Fig. 1 Cross-correlation of digitalization and sustainability of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020. Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

Economic and Environmental Index Economic growth GRP per capita Business Balance Regional budget balance University admissions Standard of living of the population Labour market tension ratio Gini coefficient -20.00

-10.14 -10.74 24.22

-0.63

92.83 84.25 30.82 20.86 26.75

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

Fig. 2 Cross-correlation of the share of innovative products and manifestations of sustainable development of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020. Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

Economic and Environmental Index Economic growth GRP per capita Business Balance Regional budget balance University admissions Standard of living of the population Labour market tension ratio Gini coefficient -40.00

-20.00

19.99 36.59 56.44 41.50 75.00 57.75 77.81 -19.52

0.00

57.80 20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

Fig. 3 Cross-correlation of the share of innovative-active enterprises and manifestations of sustainable development of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020. Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

30

S. E. Karpushova et al.

Economic and Environmental Index Economic growth GRP per capita Business Balance Regional budget balance University admissions Standard of living of the population Labour market tension ratio Gini coefficient

2.58 68.25 28.11 30.48 12.51 1.48 12.73 15.66 24.32

0.00 10.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00 Fig. 4 Cross-correlation of fixed investment and sustainable development of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020. Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

Economic and Environmental Index Economic growth GRP per capita Business Balance Regional budget balance University admissions Standard of living of the population Labour market tension ratio Gini coefficient -80.00

-60.00

-40.00

-20.00

-57.17 -52.36 -28.87 -11.94 42.08 59.11 -43.09 69.61 -25.08

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

Fig. 5 Cross-correlation of the share of expenditures on socio-cultural activities in the structure of expenditures of the regional budget and manifestations of sustainable development of Russian regions with great development potential in 2020. Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

of digitalization on sustainable development is: 39.88 + 57.36 + 33.49 + 24.07 + 29.18 + 68.38 + 50.55 = 302.92. Since in Fig. 2 the lower the Gini coefficient, the better; as well as the coefficient of tension in the labor market, and their correlation with the share of innovative products is positive, a positive effect is not being achieved. Similarly, the negative correlation of the share of innovative products with the business balance, economic growth and the environmental index indicates the impossibility of managing these manifestations of sustainable development through the share of innovative products. The sum of all correlation coefficients showing the positive impact of the share of innovative products on sustainable development is: 30.82 + 84.25 + 92.83 + 24.22 = 232.12. Since the Gini coefficient in Fig. 3 is smaller, the better, and its correlation with the share of innovative enterprises is positive—a positive effect is not being achieved. The sum of all correlation coefficients showing the positive impact of the share of

Priorities of Sustainable Development of the Territory …

31

innovative enterprises on sustainable development is: (19.52 + 77.81 + 57.75 + 75.00 + 41.50 + 56.44 + 36.59 + 19.99)/8 = 384.59. Since the Gini coefficient in Fig. 4 is smaller, the better as is the labour market strains coefficient, and their correlation with fixed investment is positive, the positive effect is not being achieved. The sum of all correlation coefficients showing the positive impact of fixed investment on sustainable development is: 12.73 + 1.48 + 12.51 + 30.48 + 28.11 + 68.25 + 2.58 = 156.15. Since the labour market strains ratio in Fig. 5 is lower, the better, and its correlation with the share of expenditures on socio-cultural activities in the structure of expenditures of the regional budget is positive, the positive effect is not being achieved. Similarly, the negative correlation of the share of innovative products with other indicators indicates the inability to manage these manifestations of sustainable development through the share of innovative products. The sum of all correlation coefficients showing the positive impact of the share of expenditures on socio-cultural activities in the structure of expenditures of the regional budget for sustainable development is: 25.08 + 59.11 + 42.08 = 126.28.

4 Conclusion As a result of the research, it was justified that the key factor for the sustainable development of the Territory is the share of innovative enterprises (the total correlation with the manifestations of sustainable development was 384.59). Also a significant factor is digitalization (302.92) and the share of innovative products (232.12). Less significant factors are investments in fixed assets (156.15) and the share of expenditures on socio-cultural activities in the structure of expenditures of the regional budget (126.28). The most manageable manifestation of sustainable development through influence on these factors is the regional budget balance, the level of education and the standard of living of the population. Ecology is the least managed manifestation of sustainable development.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515

32

S. E. Karpushova et al.

Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Degtereva EA, Zobov AM, Starostin VS (2019) Activity of Russian companies of the agri-food sector in regional industrial value-added chains. Adv Syst Sci Appl 19(1):31–43 Avery G (2018) Blueprint for implementing the UN’s sustainable development goals. Strategy Leadersh 46(5):52–53. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-09-2018-148 Borodin IP, Morozova IA (2017) Development of CSR development applications using the example of OJSC MTS. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XIII All-Russian electronic scientific and practical conference “green” economy as a practical vector of sustainable development. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/52-2017-xiii/568-razrabotka-predlozhenijpo-razvitiyu-kso-na-primere-oao-mts (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Chalhoub M (2018) Cultural heritage in sustainable development: stone houses as environmental assets in the East Mediterranean. J Cult Heritage Manag Sustain Dev 8(1):30–46. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/JCHMSD-06-2017-0040 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (ed) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham. Online ISBN 978-3-030-00102-5, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 44, pp 135–148 Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “interactive statistics and intelligent analytics of the balanced state of the regional economy of Russia in terms of big data and blockchain—2020. https://archilab.online/en/data/date-set-on-the-regional-economy (data accessed: 23.04.2020) Lawanda I (2019) The importance of information access of cultural values to the principles of sustainable development in climate change. Glob Knowl Memory Commun 69(1/2):9–19. https:// doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-03-2019-0044 Lukyanenko NA (2017) Topical problems of health tourism development. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XIII All-Russian electronic scientific and practical conference “green” economy as a practical vector of sustainable development. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017goda/52-2017-xiii/567-aktualnye-problemy-razvitiya-ozdorovitelnogo-turizma (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 15(2):589–597 Green Patrol (2020) Ecological rating of regions of Russia. https://greenpatrol.ru/ru/stranica-dlyaobshchego-reytinga/ekologicheskiy-reyting-subektov-rf?tid=368 (data accessed: 23.04.2020) Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Issues 7(4):781–791 Popkova EG (2017a) Economic and legal foundations of modern russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing

Priorities of Sustainable Development of the Territory …

33

Popkova ZV (2017b) Marketing in the activities of personnel structures. In: Popkova EG (eds) INSSCCOM17. XVI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “Marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/570-mar keting-v-deyatelnosti-kadrovykh-struktur (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (eds) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019) Top-priority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 RiaRating (2020) Rating of the socio-economic situation of the Russian regions. https://riarating. ru/infografika/20180523/630091878.html (data accessed: 23.04.2020) Rosstat (2020) Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indexes. https://www.gks.ru/bgd/regl/b18_14p/ Main.htm (data accessed: 23.04.2020) Sergi BS (2003) Economic dynamics in transitional economies: the four-P governments, the EU enlargement, and the Bruxelles consensus. Routledge, New York Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Tripathi D, Priyadarshi P, Kumar P, Kumar S (2020) Micro-foundations for sustainable development: leadership and employee performance. Int J Organ Anal 28(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJOA-01-2019-1622 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented Sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Strategic Framework for Sustainable Enterprise Development Mannaba G. Rajabova , Razet S.-A. Makkaeva , and Agyad Mahluff

Abstract Purpose: The work is aimed at the formation of strategic foundations for the sustainable development of the enterprise. Design/methodology/approach: In order to take into account the experiences of both developed and developing countries in order to obtain universal results, the study is carried out using the example of G7 countries and BRICS countries using the correlation analysis method in 2020. Findings: It was shown that most factors have a contradictory effect on the sustainability of entrepreneurship development, on the basis of which a framework strategy for the sustainable development of the enterprise was drawn up. Originality/value: As a result of the research, the strategic basis for the sustainable development of the enterprise was determined. First, the essence of the sustainable development of the enterprise is justified, which consists in its ability to adapt to market conditions, resist the negative impact of internal and external changes, as well as the ability to maintain stability of market positions and develop in order to maintain commercial efficiency in the long term perspective. Second, the pronounced specificity of the influence of various factors on the sustainability of entrepreneurship development was revealed. Third, it has been proved that infrastructure (conditions for doing business) is the universal tool for managing sustainable enterprise development. Its correlation with the rate of economic growth in developed countries was (57.21%) and in developing countries (28.44%). It is noteworthy that this tool is available only for government regulation. Also, a universal conclusion was obtained regarding foreign competition, which clearly affects the sustainability of entrepreneurship development in a very negative way. M. G. Rajabova (B) Dagestan State University, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] R. S.-A. Makkaeva Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A. Mahluff Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_4

35

36

M. G. Rajabova et al.

Keywords Framework strategy · Sustainable development · Enterprise · Economic growth · Corporate responsibility · Competition · Infrastructure · Business climate · Developed countries · Developing countries JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Entrepreneurship is one of the main subjects of economic activity, and therefore its research is of high relevance. The sustainability of the enterprise’s development as a micro-level economic system can definitely not be interpreted by analogy with macro-level systems (economies). A set of criteria by which the stability of the development of the economy is assessed is not applicable to the enterprise. The general logic of sustainable enterprise development lies in its orientation towards the future. An enterprise can be considered sustainable if it is stable in the long term and capable of development. Eben though the logic and principles are defined, the concept of sustainable enterprise development has not yet been developed and is characterized by two fundamental gaps. The first gap relates to the absence of an exact criterion by which an enterprise can be defined as sustainable. On the one hand, from the perspective of global and national sustainable development goals, an enterprise can be considered sustainable if it contributes to these goals through corporate social and environmental responsibility. On the other hand, from the point of view of modern economic science in market conditions, it is advisable to interpret the sustainable development of an enterprise as its own priority: the ability to grow, the insensitivity to crises. The second gap is the uncertainty of the possibilities and prospects for managing sustainable enterprise development. One view is that the sustainability of an enterprise is its ability to adapt to changes in the market environment, determined by the effectiveness of internal (corporate) governance. Another alternative view is that the sustainability of an enterprise can and should be subject to government regulation. These gaps pose the challenge of achieving sustainable development goals at the enterprise level, as well as at the economic level, of which it is a key actor. This work is aimed at solving the problem by creating a strategic basis for the sustainable development of the enterprise.

2 Materials and Method Conceptual and applied issues have been explored in sufficient detail in existing publications. Nevertheless, there was no single scientific idea of the sustainable

Strategic Framework for Sustainable Enterprise Development

37

development of the enterprise. In the recent years, there has been an active scientific discourse on this issue. Some authors, including Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka et al. (2020), Morozova et al. (2019), Popkova et al. (2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Sorokina, (2017), Shakhovskaya and Arakelova (2017), Artemyeva (2018) define the sustainable development of the enterprise as a variable in the function of sustainable economic development, that is, as a subject of the implementation of global goals in the field of sustainable development. In this case, the enterprise is subject to the requirements of corporate social and environmental responsibility. Other scientists, including Andronova et al. (2019), Bello and Othman (2020), Bili´nska-Reformat et al. (2019), Costa et al. (2019), Ivanov et al. (2019), Opoku (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Petrenko and Stolyarov (2019), Pritvorova et al. (2018), Ragulina et al. (2019a, b), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020) consider the sustainability of the enterprise through the prism of its commercial efficiency, that is, the ability to achieve its goal and to generate profit. In our opinion, the interpretation of the sustainability of the enterprise from the point of view of public benefit contradicts the basic idea of a market economy, according to which entrepreneurship pursues commercial interests. Focusing an enterprise on generating benefits for society obviously reduces its effectiveness, which can transform entrepreneurship into an “institutional trap”: economic practices that have ceased to make a profit. The argument for abandoning this view is also that the corporate responsibility is a part of the sustainable development of the economy and therefore its additional study at the enterprise level does not make sense (is duplication). Therefore, in this research we rely on the idea of the sustainable development of the enterprise as its stable position in the market and development. Corporate responsibility in this case is not an end in itself (priority), but an instrument for achieving the goal of sustainable development, recognized as effective only if it improves the position of the enterprise in the market and improves its commercial efficiency. In view of this, the rate of economic growth is chosen as a manifestation of sustainable enterprise development in this work. This is due to the fact that in this book we strive to obtain aggregated results that are reliable for different countries. In this work, four factors of sustainable development of the enterprise are identified: – Business index calculated by the World Bank reflecting stability and predictability of the business environment; availability of public services and ease of doing business; – Social Entrepreneurship Index, calculated by the Institute of Scientific Communications, reflecting non-commercial entrepreneurship activities and their social implications;

38

M. G. Rajabova et al.

– Global competition, calculated by the World Economic Forum, showing the openness of customs borders as well as the aggressiveness of foreign enterprises in the market; – The internal competition counted by the World Economic Forum and showing competition level in the domestic market environment. In order to take into account, the experiences of both developed and developing countries in terms of achieving universal results, this research is being conducted as exemplified in G7 and BRICS countries using the correlation analysis method in 2020, based on the data shown in Table 1. Table 1 Manifestations and drivers of sustainable enterprise development in developed and developing countries in 2020 Category

G7 Countries

BRICS Countries

Country

Index of business, Scores 1–100

Social entrepreneurship Index, Scores 1–100

Annual rate of economic growth, %

Global competition Scores 1–100

Internal competition

Doing business

Social entrepreneurship index, points 1–100

Gross domestic product in constant prices, percent change

Trade Domestic Openness, competition, value 0–100 value 0–100

Canada

79.6

70.452

1.800

67.5

France

76.8

55.341

1.796

62.2

62.2

Germany

79.7

61.14

1.290

66.7

69.7

Italy

72.9

57.568

0.800

61..5

62.2

Japan

78.0

57.793

0.210

68.8

72.0

Great Britain

83.5

70.496

1.909

64.9

64.3

USA

84.0

73.238

1.825

67.0

70.2

Brazil

59.1

49.027

2.000

46.7

45.0

China

77.9

46.685

5.900

57.6

57.5

India

71.0

54.086

7.921

43.9

56.9

Russia

78.2

61.147

1.500

50.7

55.2

South Africa

67.0

46.878

2.201

56.5

53.1

60.1

Source Compiled by authors based on materials:: Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), International Monetary Fund (2020), World Bank (2020)

Strategic Framework for Sustainable Enterprise Development

39

3 Results On the basis of the data from Table 1, the coefficients of correlation of the economic growth rate with the factors of sustainable enterprise development were calculated (Fig. 1). As shown in Fig. 1, the business index showed a high correlation with economic growth in developed countries (57.21%) and a moderate correlation in developing countries (28.44%), being the most important factor in sustainable enterprise development. The correlation of the social entrepreneurship index with the economic growth rate in developed countries is large (61.65%), and in developing countries it is small and negative (−14.08%). The correlation coefficient of global competition with economic growth in both developed (−16.97%) and developing (−23.23%) countries was negative. The correlation of domestic competition with economic growth in developed countries was −44.73%, and in developing countries 59.60%. Consequently, most factors have a contradictory effect on the sustainability of enterprise development. The results provided a framework for sustainable enterprise development (Fig. 2). As shown in Fig. 2, the basis for the sustainable development of the enterprise is infrastructure (conditions for doing business), which has a strong influence and is a universal tool available in all countries of the world and can be regulated by government. The internal management of the enterprise is not always effective: the strength and nature of its influence on the sustainability of the development of the enterprise depends on the specifics of its activities. Global competition has a moderate negative impact and therefore needs to be limited for sustainable enterprise development. Internal (domestic) competition) has a strong influence, the nature of which depends on the specifics of the enterprise. 80.00 60.00 40.00

61.65

57.21

59.60

28.44

20.00 0.00 -20.00 -40.00

Business Index

Social Enterprise Index

-14.08

Global competition

Internal competition

-16.97 -23.23 -44.73

-60.00

Countries of G7

BRICS countries

Fig. 1 Coefficient of correlation of economic growth rate with factors of sustainable development of entrepreneurship in developed and developing countries in 2020, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

40

M. G. Rajabova et al.

Internal (domestic) competition

Global (foreign) competition moderate negative impact

strength and nature of influence depend on the specifics of the

Priority: sustainable development Enterprise

strong influence, the nature of which depends on the specifics of the enterprise

Internal management strong influence, a universal instrument amenable to government regulation Infrastructure (Business Environment)

Fig. 2 Sustainable enterprise development framework. Source Developed and compiled by the authors

Therefore, in practice, a sustainable enterprise strategy must be flexible and not limited to corporate governance, but always requires government regulation.

4 Conclusion The research revealed the strategic basis for sustainable enterprise development. First, the essence of the sustainable development of the enterprise is justified, which consists in its ability to adapt to market conditions, resist the negative impact of internal and external changes. It is also consists in the ability to maintain stability of market positions and develop in the long term in order to maintain commercial efficiency. Economic growth is a manifestation of sustainable enterprise development, and corporate responsibility is one of its management tools. Second, the pronounced specificity of the influence of various factors on the sustainability of entrepreneurship development was revealed. Corporate responsibility was effective only in developed countries, and domestic competition only in developing countries. Consequently, the management of sustainable enterprise development must take into account its characteristics and must differ between developed and developing countries. Third, it has been proved that infrastructure (conditions for doing business) is the universal tool for managing sustainable enterprise development. Its correlation with the rate of economic growth in developed countries was (57.21%) and in developing countries (28.44%). It is noteworthy that this tool is available only for government

Strategic Framework for Sustainable Enterprise Development

41

regulation. Also, a universal conclusion was obtained regarding foreign competition, which clearly negatively affects the sustainability of entrepreneurship development. The aggregated results thus allow for highly effective management of sustainable enterprise development worldwide, in both developed and developing countries. However, in each country, in each market and in each individual enterprise, the proposed management measures can work differently. Further studies should therefore explore the micro-level dimension of sustainable development in the case of specific enterprises.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (eds) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Gusakov N, Ganeeva M, Dyuzheva N (2019) Common industrial policy as a factor of the development of integration processes in the EAEU. Econ Policy Emerg Econ 12(4) Artemyeva MV (2018) Analiz Sovremennikh Tendenzi Razvitiya Ekonomiki Rekreazii [Analysis of modern trends of recreation economy development]. In: Popkova EG (eds) INSSCCOM18. XVIII All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “green” economy as a practical vector of sustainable development. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/33-2018-xviii/419-ana liz-sovremennykh-tendentsij-razvitiya-ekonomiki-rekreatsii (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Bello I, Othman M (2020) Multinational corporations and sustainable development goals: examining Etisalat telecommunication intervention in Nigeria’s basic education. Int J Educ Manag 34(1):96– 110. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2019-0103 Bili´nska-Reformat K, Kucharska B, Twardzik M, Dolega L (2019) Sustainable development concept and creation of innovative business models by retail chains. Int J Retail Distrib Manag 47(1):2–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2017-0071 Costa J, Montenegro M, Gomes J (2019) Lessons from companies and destinations while leading the way for sustainable development. Worldwide Hosp Tour Themes 11(6):760–763. https://doi. org/10.1108/WHATT-09-2019-0059 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L, Tendedziso L, Mwanaumo E, Musonda N, Mambwe M (2020) Determinants of the petroleum fuel supply chain performance in Zimbabwe: a case of the national oil infrastructure company. In: Aigbavboa C, Thwala W (eds) The construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. CIDB 2019. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_58 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing

42

M. G. Rajabova et al.

Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) DataSet “social entrepreneurship in the world economy: a path from virtual scores to big data—2020”. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/ 801-data-set-social-entrepreneurship-in-the-world-economy-a-path-from-virtual-scores-to-bigdata-2020 (data accessed: 24.04.2020) International Monetary Fund (2020) World economic outlook database. https://www.imf.org/ext ernal/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/weoselgr.aspx (data accessed: 24.04.2020) Ivanov O, Zavyalova E, Ryazantsev S (2019) Public-private partnership in the countries of the eurasian economic union. Central Asia and the Caucasus. Eng Ed 2(2):33–47 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 15(2):589–597 Opoku A (2019) Sustainable development, adaptation and maintenance of infrastructure. Int J Build Pathol Adapt 37(1):2–5. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-02-2019-074 Petrenko E, Pizikov S, Mukaliev N, Mukazhan A (2018) Impact of production and transaction costs on companies’ performance according assessments of experts. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(1):398–410. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.1(24) Petrenko E, Stolyarov N (2019) Features of the management of international projects, taking into account intercultural differences of the partners. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(4):2037–2051. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(34) Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pritvorova T, Tasbulatova B, Petrenko E (2018) Possibilities of blitz-psychograms as a tool for human resource management in the supporting system of hardiness of company. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(2):840–853. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.2(25) Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019a) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019b) Toppriority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Shakhovskaya LS, Arakelova IV (2017) Problemi razvitiya rossiiskikh otraslevikh rinkov (na primere legkoi promishlennosti) [Problems of development of Russian industry markets (using the example of light industry).] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XVI AllRussian electronic seminar-conference “marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/572-problemy-razvitiya-rossij skikh-otraslevykh-rynkov-na-primere-legkoj-promyshlennosti (data accessed: 05.06.2020)

Strategic Framework for Sustainable Enterprise Development

43

Sorokina NA (2017) Marketingovie issledovaniya potrebitelskikh predpochteniy v sphere uslug [Marketing research on consumer preferences in services.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XVI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/571-marketing ovye-issledovaniya-potrebitelskikh-predpochtenij-v-sfere-uslug (data accessed: 05.06.2020) World Bank (2020) Doing business 2020. https://russian.doingbusiness.org/ru/data/doing-businessscore?topic= (data accessed: 24.04.2020)

Concept of Government Regulation of the Economy for Sustainable Development Naida D. Dzhabrailova , Liudmila P. Lipatova , and Aza A. Bisultanova

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of our work is to develop a scientific concept of public regulation of the economy for sustainable development that systematizes and classifies management measures according to their degree of conformity with the criteria of sustainability, and also offers recommendations on the application of these measures in order to fully comply with all criteria for the sustainable development of the economy. Design/methodology/approach: This work carries out a continuous correlation analysis of the entire set of measures of public administration (indicators allocated and calculated by the World Economic Forum) with manifestations of sustainable development in 2020 in order to define the conceptual framework of state regulation of the economy for sustainable development. Findings: The research has resulted in the development of the concept of government regulation of the economy for sustainable development. The concept implies the active application of universal measures, such as macroeconomic stabilization and education regulation, the flexible application of measures aimed at stabilization, but restraining growth. Also, in accordance with the author’s concept, it was recommended to limit the use of measures that impede sustainable development (application in exceptional cases if urgently necessary, taking into account the specifics of the economy). Originality/value: According to the criterion of completeness of compliance with criteria for the sustainability of economic development in their practical implementation, a concept that classified state regulation measures was developed. The main, additional and contradictory measures recommended to be limited were highlighted. As a result of the practical implementation of the concept, all criteria for the sustainable development of the economy are guaranteed, but the risk of slowing down its progress remains. N. D. Dzhabrailova (B) Dagestan State University, Makhachkala, Russia L. P. Lipatova Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A. A. Bisultanova Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_5

45

46

N. D. Dzhabrailova et al.

Keywords Concept · Government regulation · Economy · Sustainable development JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Sustainable development is the “failure” of a modern market economy, that is, its unnatural state (development process), which in most cases cannot be achieved independently and therefore needs state regulation. The traditional narrow interpretation of sustainable economic development from the point of view of protecting the environment, combating climate change and upholding social interests in the implementation of global sustainable development goals makes it possible to clearly identify a number of regulatory measures. Direct regulatory measures include the introduction of environmental norms and standards and the social policy of the state, and indirect measures include the promotion of green investment and corporate social environmental responsibility. The book is based on a broad interpretation of sustainable development, that was given in detail in Chapters “Modern Scientific Paradigm of Sustainable Economic Development”, “The Contradiction of the Sustainable Development of the Modern Economy in the Conditions of Digitalization: Flexibility and Innovation Versus Security and Stability” of the book and which took into account a number of criteria. In addition to equilibrium (the traditional criterion), stability, balance, flexibility and adaptability—are criteria for sustainable development. It is difficult to meet the criteria at the same time, as they may conflict with each other or be achievable to varying degrees. It is also difficult to identify universal public regulatory measures that ensure that all identified criteria for sustainable development are met at the same time. In this manner, the scientific and practical issue of state regulation of the economy for sustainable development arises, consisting in the uncertainty of management measures and the need to select them. At the same time, it is clear that traditional management measures to achieve sustainable development goals are not enough, and the list of regulatory measures needs to be expanded. The aim of this work is to develop a scientific concept of public regulation of the economy for sustainable development that systematizes and classifies management measures according to the degree of their compliance with the criteria of sustainability, and also offers recommendations on the application of these measures in order to fully comply with all criteria for the sustainable development of the economy.

Concept of Government Regulation of the Economy …

47

2 Materials and Method Traditional government measures for sustainable development are described in Andronova et al. (2019), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Popkova et al. (2019, 2020), Popkova and Sergi (2019), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi et al. (2019a, b, c), Sergi (2018), Sorokina (2017), Shakhovskaya and Arakelova (2017), Artemyeva (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017). Promising additional economic management measures that focus on other criteria for its sustainability are reflected in the works of Bili´nska-Reformat et al. (2019), Franco and Tracey (2019), Frolov et al. (2017), Haabazoka (2019), Haabazoka et al. (2020), Mukhi and Quental (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi et al. (2019), Zavyalova et al. (2018). A review of the available sources of research literature on the problem has shown that only its certain components have been studied, and a systemic vision of the problem itself and the prospects for solving it have not been formed. In order to define the conceptual framework of government regulation of the economy for sustainable development, this work provides a complete correlation analysis of the whole set of public administration measures (indicators allocated and calculated by the World Economic Forum) with manifestations of sustainable development: – the rate of economic growth as an indicator of compliance with the criterion of economic stability; – GDP per capita as an indicator of economic balance; – Quality of life index as an indicator of compliance with the criterion of flexibility and adaptability of the economy; – the sustainable development index as an indicator of compliance with the economic equilibrium criterion. Statistics on the application of direct government regulation of the economy and manifestations of sustainable development in the chosen number of countries in 2020 are given in Table 1, and indirect regulation measures are given in Table 2.

3 Results The results of the correlation analysis are shown in Figs. 1, 2, 3 and 4. As it can be seen from Fig. 1, a positive correlation among the measures of state regulation of the economy with the rate of economic growth was revealed in the regulation of telecommunications infrastructure (6.75%), macroeconomic stabilization (30.30%), education regulation (52.14%) and competition regulation (23.57%). As it can be seen from Fig. 2, a positive correlation was found in all State economic regulation measures with GDP per capita. It turned out to be the largest among the regulation of business culture (92.54%).

59.3

52.6

56.8

Latvia

Russia

China

71.2

USA

70.2

65.8

Korean republic

Estonia

77.4

Denmark

73.3

80.4

Singapore

UAE

78.8

New Zealand

78.5

77.0

79.7

78.8

91.9

74.3

92.8

83.3

87.1

77.7

98.8

90.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

99.8

100.0

100.0

99.7

100.0

4th pillar: Macroeco-nomic stability, 0–100

94.1

68.3

76.3

79.4

70.6

82.5

74.0

85.7

78.8

82.1

6th pillar: Skills, 0–100

6.000

1.500

3.583

2.708

3.318

2.121

3.027

1.801

2.553

2.563

3rd pillar: ICT adoption, 0–100

1st pillar: Institutions, 0–100

9850.988

11,558.835

15,996.067

20,130.347

42,661.016

64,212.535

31,180.307

55,547.883

53,557.605

43,939.310

99.87

104.05

153.59

178.27

158.32

176.77

151.19

196.47

146.09

183.07

Quality of Life index, scores 1–200

Rate of economic growth, %

GDP per capita, US $

Manifestations of sustainable development

Education regulation

Regulation of telecommunication infrastructure

Regulation of institutes

Macroeconomic stabilization

Measures of direct state regulation of the economy, scores 1–100

Source Compiled by authors based on materials Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), World Economic Forum (2020)

Countries from the middle of the rating

Top 5 countries (ranking leaders)

Position in Country business ranking

73.2

70.9

77.1

80.2

69.7

74.5

78.3

85.2

69.6

79.5

Index of sustainable development, scores 1–100

Table 1 Statistics on the application of direct state regulation of the economy and manifestations of sustainable development in the chosen countries in 2020

48 N. D. Dzhabrailova et al.

Concept of Government Regulation of the Economy …

49

Table 2 Statistics on the application of indirect government regulation of the economy in the chosen number of countries in 2020, score 1–100 Business ranking

Country

Regulation Labor of market commodity regulation markets

Regulation Competition Regulation of a regulation of business financial culture system

Regulation of innovative activity

7th pillar: Product market, 0–100

8th pillar: Labour market, 0–100

9th pillar: Financial system, 0–100

12th pillar: Innovation capability, 0–100

72.0

76.7

76.7

54.2

75.8

60.6

Singapore 81.2

81.2

91.3

71.5

75.6

75.2

Denmark

66.9

78.2

86.8

59.9

80.0

76.2

Republic of Korea

56.1

62.9

84.4

78.9

70.5

79.1

USA

68.6

78.0

91.0

99.5

84.2

84.1

71.7

66.2

73.8

70.3

69.3

52.3

62.0

70.2

65.2

42.8

69.9

52.1

58.6

67.3

57.1

44.4

65.9

42.4

TOP-5 New Countries Zealand

Countries UAE from the Estonia middle of the rating Latvia Russia China

10th pillar: 11th pillar: Market size, Business 0–100 dynamism, 0–100

52.9

61.0

55.7

84.2

63.2

52.9

57.6

59.2

75.0

100.0

66.4

64.8

Source Compiled by authors based on materials World Economic Forum (2020) -60.00

-40.00

-20.00

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

Regulation of institutions

-35.04 Regulation of telecommunications infrastructure

6.75

Macroeconomic stabilization

30.30

Regulation of education

52.14 Regulation of commodity markets

-20.90

Labour market regulation

-51.60 -9.72 Competition regulation

Regulation of the financial system 23.57 Regulation of business culture

-40.92 -18.28

Regulation of innovation activity

Fig. 1 Correlation of state regulation of the economy with economic growth rate, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

As it can be seen from Fig. 3, a positive correlation with the quality of life index was found in all measures of state regulation of the economy, except for competition regulation (−54.62%). As it can be seen from Fig. 4, a positive correlation with the sustainable development index was found in all measures of state regulation of the economy,

50

N. D. Dzhabrailova et al. 0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

83.36

Regulation of institutes 16.48

Regulation of telecommunication infrastructure Macroeconomic stabilization Education regulation

45.12 10.06

Regulation of commodity markets Labor market regulation Regulation of a financial system Competition regulation Regulation of business culture Regulation of innovative activity

77.92 84.34 82.40 8.56 92.54 67.44

Fig. 2 Correlation of state regulation of the economy with GDP per capita, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by authors -80.00

-60.00

-40.00

-20.00

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

Regulation of institutions

76.81

Regulation of telecommunication infrastructure

4.77

Macroeconomic stabilization Education regulation Regulation of commodity markets Labor market regulation Regulation of a financial system -54.62 Regulation of business culture Regulation of innovative activity

100.00

63.31 7.36 48.15 73.00 39.28 Competition regulation 71.97 22.78

Fig. 3 Correlation of state regulation of the economy with the quality of life index, %. Source Calculated and drawn by the authors

-60.00 -50.00 -40.00 -30.00 -20.00 -10.00

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

Regulation of institutes

25.12 Regulation of telecommunication -14.18 infrastructure Macroeconomic stabilization 37.71

Education regulation -16.51 Labor market regulation Regulation of a financial system -50.69 Regulation of business culture Regulation of innovative activity

34.78 Regulation of commodity markets 26.33 8.97 Competition regulation 33.83 13.44

Fig. 4 Correlation of government regulation measures with sustainable development index, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

Concept of Government Regulation of the Economy …

51

Goal: ensuring sustainable economic development based on balance, stability, balance, flexibility and adaptability

Set of state regulation measures and hierarchy of their application in order to achieve the goal

Main measures Additional measures Contradictory measures

Active application of universal measures: – macroeconomic stabilization; – education regulation. Flexible application of stabilization measures but with growth: – regulation of institutions, labour market, business cultures and innovation activity – Limiting the application of measures that impede sustainable development (to be applied in exceptional cases of urgent need, taking into account the specificities of the economy): regulation of telecommunication infrastructure; – regulation of commodity markets; – regulation of a financial system.

ResultGuaranteed compliance with all criteria for the sustainable development of the economy, but maintaining the risk of slowing its progress Fig. 5 Concept of government regulation of the economy for sustainable development. Source Developed and compiled by the authors

except for regulation of telecommunications infrastructure (−14.18%), regulation of commodity markets (−16.51%) and competition regulation (−50.69%). The results of the correlation analysis led to the concept of government regulation of the economy for sustainable development (Fig. 5). As it can be seen from Fig. 5, the developed concept classified state regulation measures according to the criterion of completeness of compliance with the criteria of sustainability of economic development in their practical implementation. The main, additional and contradictory measures recommended to be limited were highlighted.

4 Conclusion The research resulted in the development of the concept of government regulation of the economy for sustainable development. The concept implies the active application of universal measures, such as macroeconomic stabilization and education regulation, the flexible application of measures aimed at stabilization, but restraining

52

N. D. Dzhabrailova et al.

growth, including regulation of institutions, the labor market, business cultures and innovative activity. Also, in accordance with the author’s concept, it was recommended to limit the use of measures that impede sustainable development (applied in exceptional cases if urgently necessary, taking into account the specifics of the economy): regulation of telecommunications infrastructure, commodity markets and the financial system. As a result of the practical implementation of the concept, all criteria for the sustainable development of the economy are guaranteed, but the risk of slowing down its progress remains. In this regard, it must be borne in mind that sustainable development is not the only priority of modern economic systems. Achieving a priority such as sustained economic growth may require the most flexible application of the concept of government regulation of the economy for sustainable development, geared towards striking a balance between sustainability and growth priorities.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian National economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Gusakov N, Ganeeva M, Dyuzheva N (2019) Common industrial policy as a factor of the development of integration processes in the EAEU. Econ Policy Emerg Econ 12(4) Artemyeva MV (2018) Analiz Sovremennikh Tendenziy Razvitiya Ekonomiki Rekreazii. [Analysis of modern trends of recreation economy development.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XVIII All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “green” economy as a practical vector of sustainable development. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/33-2018-xviii/419-ana liz-sovremennykh-tendentsij-razvitiya-ekonomiki-rekreatsii (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Bili´nska-Reformat K, Kucharska B, Twardzik M, Dolega L (2019) Sustainable development concept and creation of innovative business models by retail chains. Int J Retail Distrib Manag 47(1):2–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2017-0071 Franco I, Tracey J (2019) Community capacity-building for sustainable development: effectively striving towards achieving local community sustainability targets. Int J Sustain High Educ 20(4):691–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2019-0052 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: Adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278

Concept of Government Regulation of the Economy …

53

Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (ed) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham, Online ISBN 978-3-030-00102-5, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Haabazoka L, Tendedziso L, Mwanaumo E, Musonda N, Mambwe M (2020) Determinants of the petroleum fuel supply chain performance in Zimbabwe: a case of the national oil infrastructure company. In: Aigbavboa C, Thwala W (eds) The construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. CIDB 2019. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_58 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (eds) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set (data accessed: 25.04.2020) Mukhi U, Quental C (2019) Exploring the challenges and opportunities of the United Nations sustainable development goals: a dialogue between a climate scientist and management scholars. Corp Gov 19(3):552–564. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-01-2018-0028 Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Issues 7(4):781–791. https://www.researchg ate.net/publication/326001978_Sustainable_developmet_processes_Service_sector_in_post-ind ustrial_economy Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing. Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety versus rationality. Springer International Publishing Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Egorova EN, Popova E, Pozdnyakova UA (2019) The model of state management of economy on the basis of the internet of things. Stud Comput Intel 826:1137–1144 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019) Top-priority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Sozinova AA, Fetisova OV (2019a) Modeling Russian industrial, tech, and financial cooperation with the Asia-Pacific region. In: Sergi BS (ed) Tech, smart cities, and

54

N. D. Dzhabrailova et al.

regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, pp 195–223 Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Vovchenko N, Ponomareva M (2019b) Central Asia and China: financial development through cooperation with Russia. In: Barnett WA, Bruno SS (eds) AsiaPacific contemporary finance and development international symposia in economic theory and econometrics, vol 26. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, pp 141–164 Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019c) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Shakhovskaya LS, Arakelova IV (2017) Problemi razvitiya rossiskikh otraslevikh rinkov (na primere legkoi promishlennosti. [Problems of development of Russian industry markets (using the example of light industry).] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XVI AllRussian electronic seminar-conference “marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/572-problemy-razvitiyarossijskikh-otraslevykh-rynkov-na-primere-legkoj-promyshlennosti (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Sorokina NA (2017) Marketingovie issledovaniya potrebitelskikh predpochteniy v sphere uslug [Marketing research on consumer preferences in services.] In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM17. XVI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/571-marketingovyeissledovaniya-potrebitelskikh-predpochtenij-v-sfere-uslug (data accessed: 05.06.2020) World Economic Forum (2020) The global competitiveness report 2019. https://www.weforum.org/ reports/how-to-end-a-decade-of-lost-productivity-growth (data accessed: 25.04.2020) Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Effective Regulation of Entrepreneurs and Their Associations for Sustainable Development Nikolay N. Nadezhin

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of the work is to develop a scientific and methodological platform to ensure effective regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations for sustainable development. Design/methodology/approach: The effectiveness of indirect regulation of sustainable development (through the management of the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations) is assessed not only from the point of view of public benefits, but also from the benefits for entrepreneurs themselves, as well as focusing on the costs of enterprises and their associations, devoting state expenditures to the background. The lost profit of entrepreneurship from corporate responsibility is also taken into account. Findings: A scientific and methodological framework has been established to ensure effective regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations for sustainable development. Scientific and methodological recommendations are proposed that allow assessing the effectiveness and achieving high efficiency in state regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs, cluster associations of entrepreneurs, associations of entrepreneurs on the basis of special economic zones and associations of entrepreneurs on the basis of technology parks and innovative networks. Originality/value: Thanks to the proposed proprietary scientific and methodological recommendations, it is possible to develop and implement a flexible policy of state regulation of entrepreneurship for sustainable development. The specificity of measures of indirect (through entrepreneurship) state regulation of sustainable development and the need to take into account the specifics of regulatory objects—entrepreneurs and their various associations are also justified. Keywords Efficiency · Ensuring efficiency · Regulation · Activity of businessmen · Associations of businessmen · Business · Sustainable development goals JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58 N. N. Nadezhin (B) Southwest State University, Kursk, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_6

55

56

N. N. Nadezhin

1 Introduction The regulation of entrepreneurs and their associations plays an important role in the process of ensuring the sustainable development of the economy. Entrepreneurship, as a source of private investment in the economy and a key economic actor, can either provide meaningful support to the national sustainable development strategy or express a significant protest against it, preventing its practical implementation. Therefore, government regulation is aimed at preventing opportunistic practices among entrepreneurs, as well as their involvement in supporting implemented practices in the field of sustainable development. The advantage of the participation of entrepreneurs and their associations in the implementation of national sustainable development strategies is, firstly, the reduction of direct public spending on environmental protection and social support of the population by replacing them with private investment. Taking into account that social policy accounts for more than 50% of expenditures in the structure of state budgets in modern economic systems, significant savings in budget funds can be achieved and budget deficits can be overcome. In addition, the involvement of entrepreneurs and their associations in the implementation of sustainable development goals on market terms can be a measure of support for entrepreneurship. Private investments are placed only on payback conditions and in the interests of maximizing profitability. The creation of favorable conditions for the state to profit from entrepreneurship from the implementation of socially significant projects in the field of sustainable development will create a new, promising direction for the placement of private investment in the economy. Thus, efficiency should be a key reference point in the process of regulating the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations for sustainable development, which involves exceeding the advantages over costs for both the state/society and entrepreneurship. The aim of this work is to develop a scientific and methodological platform to ensure effective regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations for sustainable development.

2 Materials and Method The general issues of regulation of sustainable development on the principles of efficiency are discussed in the works of Andronova et al. (2019), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka et al. (2020), Ivanov et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Petrenko and Stolyarov (2019), Pichkov (2016), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Sergi et al. (2019), Sorokina, (2017), Shakhovskaya and Arakelova (2017), Artemyeva (2018). Specific methodological issues to ensure effective management of sustainable development are disclosed in Costa et al. (2019), Franco and Tracey (2019), Frolov et al. (2017), Milind and Rangarajan (2020), Morozova et al. (2019), Popkova et al.

Effective Regulation of Entrepreneurs and Their Associations …

57

(2014, 2016, 2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Tripathi et al. (2020), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). A literature review suggests that existing research and publications focus on the practice of direct (direct-acting) government regulation of sustainable development, while indirect (business-mediated) regulation is little scientifically and methodically understood. The effectiveness of direct management practices is assessed through the ratio of the benefits of regulation (for example, social progress, improving the quality of life, combating climate change) to the costs of regulation (for example, state budget expenditures on social policy, state costs for environmental protection). The greater the ratio (the greater the benefits exceed the cost of achieving them), the greater the efficiency. The effectiveness of indirect regulation of sustainable development (through the management of entrepreneurs and their associations) should take into account not only public benefits, but also benefits for entrepreneurs themselves, as well as focus on the costs of enterprises and their associations, devoting state expenditures to the background. The lost profit of entrepreneurship from corporate responsibility should also be taken into account.

3 Results The scientific and methodological basis for ensuring effective regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations for sustainable development is given in Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4. As it can be seen from Table 1, in regulating the activities of entrepreneurs for sustainable development, transnational corporations, enterprises in priority sectors of the economy, city-forming enterprises are regulated. The positive effect is limited to enterprises of national importance. The effect for entrepreneurs is associated with increasing competitiveness and increasing market share. The effect for the national economy is to develop exports, import substitution, and support single-industry towns. The costs of state regulation of entrepreneurs include targeted financing (support for individual enterprises), and the costs of enterprises for financing sustainable development include green investments, financing corporate social and environmental responsibility activities. The lost benefit of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development is the income from investments in innovative projects associated with high social and environmental risks. As it can be seen from Table 2, sectoral economic clusters are regulated in regulating the activities of cluster associations of entrepreneurs for sustainable development. The positive effect is limited to the target sector of the economy. The effect for entrepreneurs is associated with a reduction in marketing and innovation costs, as

58

N. N. Nadezhin

Table 1 Scientific and methodological framework for effective regulation of entrepreneurs for sustainable development Efficiency characteristic

Intrinsic expression of characteristic

Areas under supervision

Transnational corporations, enterprises in priority sectors of the economy, city-forming enterprises

Limits of positive effect Benefits of sustainable development

Costs of sustainable development

Enterprises of national value Outcome for businessmen

Increasing competitiveness, increasing market share

Outcome for national economy

Export development, import substitution, support for single-industry towns

Costs of state regulation of entrepreneurs

Point financing (support for individual enterprises)

Costs of enterprises in financing sustainable development

Green investment, financing corporate social and environmental responsibility activities

Shortfall in profits of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development

Income from investments in innovative projects associated with high social and environmental risks

Source Developed and compiled by the author Table 2 Scientific and methodological framework for ensuring effective regulation of the activities of cluster associations of entrepreneurs for sustainable development Efficiency characteristic

Intrinsic expression of characteristic

Areas under supervision

Branch economic clusters

Limits of positive effect Benefits of sustainable development

Target branch of economy Outcome for businessmen

Reducing marketing and innovation costs, increasing stakeholder loyalty

Outcome for the target sector Accelerated development of of the economy targeted industries, import substitution Costs of sustainable development

Costs of state regulation of entrepreneurs

Financial support for clusters, costs of their regulation

Costs of enterprises in financing sustainable development

Total investments of cluster members in sustainable development activities

The lost benefit of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development

Potential profits from projects implemented individually and contrary to cluster interests

Source Developed and compiled by the author

Effective Regulation of Entrepreneurs and Their Associations …

59

Table 3 Scientific and methodological basis for ensuring effective regulation of business associations based on special economic zones for sustainable development Eficiency characteristic

Intrinsic expression of characteristic

Areas under supervision

Special economic zones

Limits of positive effect

Territory

Benefits of sustainable development

Costs of sustainable development

Outcomes for businessmen

Tax incentives, access to unique infrastructure

Outcome for the territory

Creating territories of advanced economic development, increasing the quality of life, improving the environment

Costs of state regulation of entrepreneurs

Tax support for special economic zones, financing the development of their infrastructure

Costs of enterprises in financing sustainable development

Investment by residents of special economic zones in sustainable development activities

The lost benefit of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development

Potential profits from projects implemented individually and contrary to the requirements for participants in special economic zones

Source Developed and compiled by the author

well as with an increase in the loyalty of interested parties. The effect for the target sector of the economy is its accelerated development and import substitution. The costs of state regulation of entrepreneurs cover the financial support of clusters and the costs of their regulation. The cost to enterprises of financing sustainable development includes the total investment of cluster members in sustainable development activities. The lost benefit of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development is a potential profit from projects implemented individually and contrary to the interests of the cluster. As it can be seen from Table 3, the subject of regulation are special economic zones, when regulating the activities of associations of entrepreneurs on the basis of special economic zones for sustainable development. The positive effect is limited to the territory. The effect for entrepreneurs is related to obtaining tax benefits and access to unique infrastructure. The effect for the territory is to create territories of advanced economic development, increase the quality of life, improve the environment. The costs of state regulation of entrepreneurs are associated with tax support for special economic zones, financing the development of their infrastructure. The cost to enterprises of financing sustainable development includes investments by residents of special economic zones in sustainable development activities. The lost benefit of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development is a potential profit from projects

60

N. N. Nadezhin

Table 4 Scientific and methodological framework for ensuring effective regulation of business associations based on technology parks and innovation networks for sustainable development Efficiency characteristic

Intrinsic expression of characteristic

Areas under supervision

Science and technology parks, innovative networks

Limits of positive effect Benefits of sustainable development

Costs of sustainable development

Innovative field of economy Outcome for businessmen

The improved commercialization of innovations

Outcome on the innovation sector of the economy

Reducing the risks of innovation, their benefits for sustainable development

Costs of state regulation of entrepreneurs

Investment in innovation, targeted financing for innovation, tax support for innovation, R&D grants

Costs of enterprises in financing sustainable development

Financing additional research related to the impact of innovation on sustainable economic development

The lost benefit of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development

Avoiding further development and commercialization of innovations contrary to the goals of sustainable economic development

Source Developed and compiled by the author

implemented individually and contrary to the requirements for participants in special economic zones. As it can be seen from Table 4, when regulating the activities of associations of entrepreneurs based on technology parks and innovative networks for sustainable development, the objects of regulation are technology parks and innovative networks. The positive effect is limited by the innovative sphere of the economy. The effect for entrepreneurs is associated with an improved commercialization of innovation. The effect on the innovation sector of the economy is to reduce the risks of innovation, their advantages for sustainable development. The costs of government regulation of entrepreneurs include investment in innovation, targeted financing of innovation, tax support for innovation, and R&D grants. The cost to enterprises of financing sustainable development includes the financing of additional research related to the impact of innovation on sustainable economic development. The lost benefit of entrepreneurs in favor of sustainable development is the rejection of the further development and commercialization of innovations that contradict the goals of sustainable economic development.

Effective Regulation of Entrepreneurs and Their Associations …

61

4 Conclusion Summarizing the results obtained, we note that a scientific and methodological basis has been formed to ensure effective regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs and their associations for sustainable development. Scientific and methodological recommendations are proposed that allow assessing the effectiveness and achieving high efficiency in state regulation of the activities of entrepreneurs, cluster associations of entrepreneurs, associations of entrepreneurs on the basis of special economic zones and associations of entrepreneurs on the basis of technology parks and innovative networks. This enables the development and implementation of flexible public enterprise policies for sustainable development. The specificity of measures of indirect (through entrepreneurship) state regulation of sustainable development and the need to take into account the specifics of regulatory objects—entrepreneurs and their various associations are also justified.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Gusakov N, Ganeeva M, Dyuzheva N (2019) Common industrial policy as a factor of the development of integration processes in the EAEU. Econ Policy Emerg Econ 12(4) Artemyeva MV (2018) Analiz sovrememnnikh tendenziy razvitiya ekonomiki rekreazii [Analysis of modern trends of recreation economy development.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XVIII All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “green” economy as a practical vector of sustainable development. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/33-2018-xviii/419-ana liz-sovremennykh-tendentsij-razvitiya-ekonomiki-rekreatsii (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Costa J, Montenegro M, Gomes J (2019) Lessons from companies and destinations while leading the way for sustainable development. Worldwide Hosp Tour Themes 11(6):760–763. https://doi. org/10.1108/WHATT-09-2019-0059 Franco I, Tracey J (2019) Community capacity-building for sustainable development: effectively striving towards achieving local community sustainability targets. Int J Sustain High Educ 20(4):691–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2019-0052 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45

62

N. N. Nadezhin

Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L, Tendedziso L, Mwanaumo E, Musonda N, Mambwe M (2020) Determinants of the petroleum fuel supply chain performance in Zimbabwe: a case of the national oil infrastructure company. In: Aigbavboa C, Thwala W (eds) The construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. CIDB 2019. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_58 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Ivanov O, Zavyalova E, Ryazantsev S (2019) Public-private partnership in the countries of the eurasian economic union. Central Asia Caucasus. Eng Ed 2(2):33–47 Milind KJ, Rangarajan K (2020) The approach of Indian corporates towards sustainable development: an exploration using sustainable development goals based model. Sustain Dev. https://doi. org/10.1002/sd.2053 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 15(2):589–597 Petrenko E, Pizikov S, Mukaliev N, Mukazhan A (2018) Impact of production and transaction costs on companies’ performance according assessments of experts. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(1):398–410. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.1(24) Petrenko E, Stolyarov N (2019) Features of the management of international projects, taking into account intercultural differences of the partners. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(4):2037–2051. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(34) Pichkov OB (2016) Social inequality in the US and Canada. Int Trends (Mezhdunarodnye protsessy) 2(3):85–92 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019) Top-priority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Shakhovskaya LS, Arakelova IV (2017) Problemi razvitiya Rossiiskikh otraslevikh rinkov (na primere legkoi promishlennosti) [Problems of development of Russian industry markets

Effective Regulation of Entrepreneurs and Their Associations …

63

(using the example of light industry).] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM17. XVI AllRussian electronic seminar-conference “marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/572-problemy-razvitiyarossijskikh-otraslevykh-rynkov-na-primere-legkoj-promyshlennosti (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Sorokina NA (2017) Marketingovie issledovaniya potrebitelskikh predpochteniy v sphere uslug [Marketing research on consumer preferences in services.] In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM17. XVI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “marketing AND PR: new tools AND practical solutions.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2017-goda/55-2017-xvi/571-marketing ovye-issledovaniya-potrebitelskikh-predpochtenij-v-sfere-uslug (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Tripathi D, Priyadarshi P, Kumar P, Kumar S (2020) Micro-foundations for sustainable development: leadership and employee performance. Int J Organ Anal 28(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJOA-01-2019-1622

Course for Sustainable Economic Development

Managing Economic Growth for Sustainable Economic Development Oksana V. Takhumova , Olga N. Muratova , and Zalina R. Israilova

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of this work is to develop a forward-looking approach to managing economic growth for sustainable economic development. Design/methodology/approach: The authors compare the criteria for sustainable development and the contribution of economic growth to its achievement. Statistics of economic growth, its variation and potential factors in countries with the highest economic growth rate in 2020 are analyzed. The variation of economic growth rate in 2016–2020 is calculated and studied. (five-year cut) in the countries with the highest value of this indicator in 2020, and also the correlation of the obtained values with the following indicators, reflecting the assumed general factors of economic growth and sustainable development, allowing them to balance. Findings: It was revealed that the relationship of the selected factors with the growth rate differs significantly from their relationship with its variation. None of the potential factors has confirmed their ability to simultaneously reduce and accelerate the variation in economic growth. The least controversial was the innovation index, the impact of which on economic growth allows it to slow down slightly (−35.25%) and moderately increase its variation (24.85%). It is therefore the management of this factor that has the greatest prospect of harmonizing the objectives of accelerating economic growth and achieving sustainable development. Originality/value: It is justified that no factor of economic growth makes it possible to simultaneously comply with the interests of accelerating its pace and reducing its variation. Consequently, sustained positive economic growth cannot be achieved in the long term through public administration. Thus, managing economic growth for the sustainable development of the economy always involves limiting the rate of economic growth, that is, abandoning O. V. Takhumova (B) Kuban State Agrarian University Named After I.T. Trubilin, Krasnodar, Russia e-mail: [email protected] O. N. Muratova Admiral Ushakov Maritime State University, Novorossiysk, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Z. R. Israilova Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_7

67

68

O. V. Takhumova et al.

the potential for economic development in favor of protecting the environment and the interests of society. Keywords Public administration · Economic growth · Sustainable economic development · Modern economic systems JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction The management of economic growth is one of the main areas of state economic policy. On the basis of economic growth, resources are generated that are necessary to solve domestic problems, for example, financing social and innovative projects, as well as external-oriented tasks for the development of economic systems, including increasing global competitiveness. However, economic growth has a controversial effect on the sustainability of economic systems, regardless of the phase of the economic cycle. At the upward phase of the cycle, a high GDP growth rate is achieved, which, according to the theory of economic growth, is interpreted positively and considered as the optimal period for the development of economic systems. At the same time, the implications for sustainable development depend on the sources of economic growth, as well as on the needs of society for which the income from it is redistributed. For example, if economic growth is achieved through the exhaustion of natural resources and/or the income from it is concentrated in narrow social circles (the first case), then the economic system becomes less stable. Conversely, if economic growth does not damage the environment, and the income from it is evenly distributed in society (the second case), the economic system comes into equilibrium. In the downward phase of the cycle, GDP growth is slowed down, which is negatively interpreted from the perspective of the theory of economic growth. In the first case, this contributes to sustainable development, and in the second it prevents it. Therefore, conceptually, the theory of economic growth and the theory of sustainable development conflict with each other. In accordance with this, this work hypothesizes that they are influenced in different ways by the development factors of economic systems, but the flexible management of these factors allows balancing economic growth and sustainable development. The aim of the work is to develop a forward-looking approach to managing economic growth for sustainable economic development.

Managing Economic Growth for Sustainable Economic Development

69

2 Materials and Method Growth is the basic and most studied, developed topic of economic science. At the same time, its impact on the sustainable development of the economy is not sufficiently studied and is only beginning to be actively studied under the influence of popularization of sustainable development goals. Some issues of the impact of economic growth on the sustainability of modern economic systems are disclosed in the works of Frolovet al. (2017), Inshakov et al. (2019), Ivanov et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova and Gulzat (2020), Popkova et al. (2017), Popkova and Sergi (2019), Sergi (2003), Sergi et al. (2019a, b), Shulus et al. (2020), Kuznetsov, (2018), Kozlova, (2018), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). Economic growth is opposed to sustainable development in the works of Andronova et al. (2019a, b), Donaires et al. (2019), Franco and Tracey (2019), Haabazoka et al. (2020), Lawanda (2019), Mukhi and Quental (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019a, b). A literature reference showed that existing publications emphasized the antagonism of economic growth and sustainable development, and the prospects for their integration were not defined. To identify them, this work compares the criteria for sustainable development identified in the first and second chapters of this book and the contribution of economic growth to their achievement (Table 1). Based on the data from Table 1, the contribution of economic growth to sustainable development is classified (by significance criterion) into concomitant and major. The accompanying contribution is characteristic of those sustainable development criteria that are met by factors other than economic growth itself, but it can also play an important role in achieving them. Thus, in order to maintain the equilibrium of the economy, green economic growth is necessary, in order to ensure the balance of the economy, an even distribution of the benefits of economic growth in society is required, and high-tech economic growth is recommended for flexibility and adaptability of the economy. The main contribution is noted when economic growth fully determines compliance with the criterion of sustainable development. Thus, economic stability is Table 1 Criteria for sustainable development and the contribution of economic growth to their achievement Criterion for sustainable economic development

Contribution of economic growth to sustainability

Economy Equilibrium

“Green” economic growth

Economic Balance

Equitable distribution of the benefits of economic growth in society

Flexibility and adaptability of the economy

Hi-tech economic growth

Economic Stability

Stable (with minimal variation) economic growth

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

70

O. V. Takhumova et al.

achieved through stable (with minimal variation) economic growth, which avoids economic crises and shocks associated with a sharp acceleration of economic growth, which can also conflict with the goals of sustainable development. This paper calculates and examines the variation in the rate of economic growth (Gross domestic product, constant prices, percent change) in 2016–2020 (five-year cut) in the countries with the highest value of this indicator in 2020, and also determines the correlation of the values with the following indicators, reflecting the assumed general factors of economic growth and sustainable development, allowing them to balance: – – – – –

Ease of doing Business Index (doing business); Index of economic freedom; Globalization index (KOF globalization index); innovation index (global innovation index); cumulative investments into economy (total investment, percent of GDP). The research is based on the 2020 data shown in Table 2.

3 Results Based on the data in Table 1, a graphical variation of the economic growth rate in each of the sample countries in 2016–2020 is calculated and presented (Fig. 1). As it can be seen from Fig. 1, the highest variation in the economic growth rate in Russia (68.39%). It is also quite large in Iceland (39.38%), Chile (26.96%) and Ireland (26.86%), and the smallest in the Philippines (1.44%). On the basis of the data from Tables 1 and Fig. 1, the correlation of economic growth rate and its variation with the set of factors in the sample countries is calculated (Fig. 2). As it can be seen from Fig. 2, the association of the selected factors with the growth rate differs significantly from their association with its variation. In such a way, the ease of doing business index shows a high positive relationship with the variation in economic growth rate (correlation 54.53%), and also moderately restrains economic growth (correlation −30.84%). The index of economic freedom shows a moderate positive relationship with a variation in the rate of economic growth (correlation of 20.27%), and also strongly restrains economic growth (correlation of −47.51%). The globalization index shows a high positive relationship with the variation in economic growth (correlation 42.13%), and also strongly restrains economic growth (correlation −81.02%). The innovation index shows a high moderate association with a variation in economic growth rate (correlation of 24.85%), and also significantly restrains economic growth (correlation of −35.25%). Total investment in the economy shows a high positive relationship with a variation in the rate of economic growth (correlation of 48.94%), and also restrains economic growth (correlation of −51.34%). Therefore, none of the potential factors has confirmed their ability to simultaneously reduce and accelerate the variation in economic growth. The least controversial

62.8

69.6

79.0

72.6

Philippines

Indonesia

Iceland

Chile

61.0

69.7

67.9

76.8

77.1

67.2

64.5

59.5

69.5

56.5

80.9

70.9

Index of economic freedom, points 1–100

72.45

79.74

70.35

77.74

72.34

62.47

67.41

65.08

77.79

62.10

87.97

52.37

Index of globalization, points 1–100

37.62

36.76

32.93

36.64

51.53

29.72

36.18

54.82

49.01

36.58

56.10

27.38

Index of innovations, points 1–100

21.189

25.329

23.391

21.339

22.887

34.591

29.049

41.957

22.649

32.093

31.986

23.182

Total investment in the economy, % of GDP

4.200 1.400

−0.248

3.500

1.672

5.695

5.100

6.800

6.582

4.058

7.179

3.495

6.100

2017 (%)

4.785

3.897

1.555

7.200

5.016

6.839

6.700

5.041

6.828

5.222

5.932

2016 (%)

1.444

3.400

3.718

2.316

3.639

5.300

6.900

6.168

3.494

7.685

3.155

6.800

2018 (%)

Economic growth rate (at fixed prices)

1.500

3.300

3.838

2.700

3.225

5.400

7.015

6.000

3.211

7.791

3.014

7.300

2019 (%)

1.500

3.300

3.709

2.900

3.114

5.500

7.017

5.900

3.092

7.921

2.908

7.500

2020 (%)

Source Compiled by authors based on materials Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), International Monetary Fund (2020), KOF Swiss Economic Institute (2020), The Heritage Foundation (2020), World Bank (2020)

78.2

77.9

China

Russia

66.1

Malta

68.7

71.0

India

73.3

79.6

Ireland

Romania

76.5

Rwanda

Peru

Ease of doing business index, points 1–100

Countries

Table 2 Statistics of economic growth, its variation and potential factors in countries with the highest economic growth rate in 2020

Managing Economic Growth for Sustainable Economic Development 71

72

O. V. Takhumova et al.

80.00

68.39

70.00 60.00 50.00

39.38

40.00

26.86

30.00 20.00 10.00

10.40

26.96

21.11 6.16

17.62 5.65

1.44

4.09

3.85

0.00

Fig. 1 Variation of economic growth rate (in constant prices) in 2016–2020 in sample countries, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

Ease of doing business index, points 1-100 59.37 Total investment in the economy,% of GDP

66.02

-45.28

-56.14

-58.24

Index of economic freedom, points 1-100 22.12

-77.92 20.92 Index of innovations,

-20.68

45.08 Index of globalization,

correlation with variation in economic growth rate correlation with economic growth (at constant prices) Fig. 2 Correlation of economic growth rate and variation with a set of factors in sample countries, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

was the innovation index, whose impact on economic growth allows it to slow down slightly and moderately increase its variation. It is therefore the management of this factor that has the greatest prospect of harmonizing the objectives of accelerating economic growth and achieving sustainable development.

Managing Economic Growth for Sustainable Economic Development

73

4 Conclusion As a result of the research, the hypothesis put forward is refuted (not confirmed). There is no single factor of economic growth that simultaneously respects the interests of accelerating its pace and reducing its variation. Consequently, sustained positive economic growth cannot be achieved in the long term through public administration. Thus, managing economic growth for the sustainable development of the economy always involves limiting the rate of economic growth, that is, abandoning the potential for economic development in favor of protecting the environment and the interests of society. The finding indicates that the theory of sustainable development is closely related to the concept of corporate social (and environmental) responsibility. Future studies should therefore explore their relationship in more detail.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian National economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Degtereva EA, Zobov AM, Starostin VS (2019a) Activity of Russian companies of the agri-food sector in regional industrial value-added chains. Adv Syst Sci Appl 19(1):31–43 Andronova IV, Gusakov N, Ganeeva M, Dyuzheva N (2019b) Common industrial policy as a factor of the development of integration processes in the EAEU. Econ Policy Emerg Econ 12(4) Donaires O, Cezarino L, Caldana A, Liboni L (2019) Sustainable development goals—an analysis of outcomes. Kybernetes 48(1):183–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-10-2017-0401 Franco I, Tracey J (2019) Community capacity-building for sustainable development: effectively striving towards achieving local community sustainability targets. Int J Sustain High Educ 20(4):691–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2019-0052 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Haabazoka L, Tendedziso L, Mwanaumo E, Musonda N, Mambwe M (2020) Determinants of the petroleum fuel supply chain performance in Zimbabwe: a case of the national oil infrastructure company. In: Aigbavboa C, Thwala W (eds) The construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. CIDB 2019. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_58 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing

74

O. V. Takhumova et al.

Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 44, pp 135–148 Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set (data accessed: 03.05.2020) International Monetary Fund (2020) World economic outlook database. https://www.imf.org/ext ernal/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/weoselgr.aspx (data accessed: 03.05.2020) Ivanov O, Zavyalova E, Ryazantsev S (2019) Public-private partnership in the countries of the eurasian economic union. Central Asia and the Caucasus. Eng Ed 2(2):33–47 KOF Swiss Economic Institute (2020) Globalisation index. https://kof.ethz.ch/en/forecasts-and-ind icators/indicators/kof-globalisation-index.html (data accessed: 03.05.2020) Kozlova EP (2018) Analiz sovremennikh tendenciy i prognoz razvitiya ekonomiki [Analysis of current trends and forecasts of economic development.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/586-analiz-sov remennykh-tendentsij-i-prognozov-razvitiya-ekonomiki (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Kuznetsov VP (2018) Ocenka sovremennogo sostoyaniya i prognozov obespecheniya ekonomicherskoi bezopasnosti promishlennogo predpriyatiya [Assessment of the current state and forecasts of ensuring the economic security of an industrial enterprise.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018xxi/585-otsenka-sovremennogo-sostoyaniya-i-prognozov-obespecheniya-ekonomicheskoj-bez opasnosti-promyshlennogo-predpriyatiya (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Lawanda I (2019) The importance of information access of cultural values to the principles of sustainable development in climate change. Glob Knowl Memory Commun 69(1/2):9–19. https:// doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-03-2019-0044 Mukhi U, Quental C (2019) Exploring the challenges and opportunities of the United Nations sustainable development goals: a dialogue between a climate scientist and management scholars. Corp Gov 19(3):552–564. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-01-2018-0028 Petrenko E, Pizikov S, Mukaliev N, Mukazhan A (2018) Impact of production and transaction costs on companies’ performance according assessments of experts. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(1):398–410. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.1(24) Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020) Contradiction of the digital economy: public well-being versus cyber threats. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 87, pp 112–124 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety versus rationality. Springer International Publishing Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova WA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018) Genezis revoluzionnogo perehoda k industrii 4.0 v 21 dtrt i kontrast s prediduchimi promishlennimi revoluziyami [The genesis of the revolutionary transition to industry 4.0 in the 21st century and the contrast with previous industrial revolutions.] In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https:// archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/587-genezis-revolyutsionnogo-perekhoda-

Managing Economic Growth for Sustainable Economic Development

75

k-industrii-4-0-v-xxi-veke-i-kontrast-s-predydushchimi-promyshlennymi-revolyutsiyami (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019) Top-priority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 Sergi BS (2003) Economic dynamics in transitional economies: the four-P governments, the EU enlargement, and the bruxelles consensus. Routledge, New York Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Vovchenko N, Ponomareva M (2019a) Central Asia and China: financial development through cooperation with Russia. In: Barnett WA, Sergi BS (eds) AsiaPacific contemporary finance and development (International symposia in economic theory and econometrics), vol 26. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, pp 141–164 Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019b) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 92, pp 353–359 The Heritage Foundation (2020) 2020 index of economic freedom. https://www.heritage.org/index/ ranking (data accessed: 03.05.2020) World Bank (2020) Doing business 2020. https://russian.doingbusiness.org/ru/data/doing-businessscore (data accessed: 03.05.2020)

Prospects for Ensuring the Sustainability of Territories of Advanced Socio-Economic Development Oksana V. Takhumova , Al-Makhzoomi Hassan Mohammed Hassan , and Razet S.-A. Makkaeva

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of this work is to identify and scientifically justify the prospects for ensuring the sustainability of territories of advanced socioeconomic development and to propose a set of necessary framework measures for this. Design/methodology/approach: This research is based on the case method, with the help of which the modern Russian experience of creating territories of advanced socio-economic development is studied. The authors selected 5 territories of advanced socio-economic development, which were created by one of the first in Russia, and therefore at present, on their example, the results of their development are most clearly visible. They are studied as part of the regions of Russia, in which they are included on the basis of regional statistics using the correlation analysis method. A SWOT analysis is also carried out to ensure the sustainability of territories of advanced socio-economic development. Findings: It was revealed that in general, the number of priority activities (total correlation 182, 53) most affects the stability of territories of advanced socio-economic development, since it determines the level of competition. In the internal structure of sustainability, the number of priority activities is also a key factor in human development (90, 87) and economic security (56, 96). For the environment, management factors such as the number of activities (34, 70) and capital investments (31, 36) are almost equivalent. Originality/value: It is justified that the prospects for ensuring the sustainability of the territories of advanced socio-economic development are associated with the development of competition, the intensification of innovation and increased corporate social responsibility. To this end, a set of framework measures is recommended for practical implementation, including expanding the list of priority activities, regulatory O. V. Takhumova (B) Kuban State Agrarian University Named After I.T. Trubilin, Krasnodar, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A.-M. H. M. Hassan Tambov State Technical University, Tambov, Russia e-mail: [email protected] R. S.-A. Makkaeva Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_8

77

78

O. V. Takhumova et al.

regulation of competition (antimonopoly regulation), as well as attracting capital investments in the implementation of green investment and innovation projects. Keywords Sustainability · Territory of advanced socio-economic development · Single-industry city · Regions of Russia JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction In countries with a pronounced regionalization of the national economy, that is, with a strong differentiation of regions according to geographical characteristics and socio-economic situation, which include Russia, the problem of systemic sustainable development is of high relevance. The essence of this problem is to prevent the achievement of sustainable development of some territories (the cities, regions, areas) at the expense of others as explicitly—by means of transfer on them social and ecological expenses of the economic growth and realization of the inter-budgetary transfers which are not proved by the interests of sustainable development, and indirectly—by means of creation of negative external externalities, for example, crisis of territorial business because of strengthening of the interregional competition and decrease in competitiveness of some territories against the background of others (which quicker). Special attention should be paid to priority socio-economic development in addressing this problem. These are territories that have long been lagging behind other territories in terms of socio-economic development. In most cases, it is a singleindustry town—the territories on which the main city-forming enterprise operates, providing jobs for most local residents. The almost complete absence of competition of enterprises distorts the market environment of the territories in question, which leads to their chronic lag. To overcome it, lagging territories are given a special regulatory status (for example, subsidies are provided to finance infrastructure, tax incentives for investors), designed to increase business activity and establish an effective market mechanism. Since the described process of creating territories of advanced socio-economic development is launched due to their economic lag, their sustainability is not given enough attention by state regulators, which poses increased risks to the sustainable development of the studied territories. The purpose of this work is to identify and scientifically justify the prospects for ensuring the sustainability of territories of advanced socio-economic development and to propose a set of necessary framework measures for this.

Prospects for Ensuring the Sustainability of Territories …

79

2 Materials and Method Published studies on the topic of sustainable development, which focus on the territorial aspect of this process as the theoretical and methodological basis of this study, are: Andronova et al. (2019), Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka et al. (2020), Ivanov (2019), Petrenko and Stolyarov (2019), Pichkov (2016), Popkova and Sergi (2020), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2020), Popkova and Sergi (2019), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Pritvorova et al. (2018), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2003, 2018, 2019), Sergi et al. (2019a, b), , Kuznetsov, (2018), Kozlova, (2018), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018). Zavyalova et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017). Nevertheless, the prospects for ensuring the sustainability of territories of advanced socio-economic development in the listed publications have not been identified and need to be independently studied. This research is based on the case method, with the help of which the modern russian experience of creating territories of advanced socio-economic development is studied. According to materials of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation (2020), this process is regulated by the Federal law of 29.12.2014 No. 473-FZ “About Territories of the Advancing Social and Economic Development in the Russian Federation” and the Russian Federation Government decree of 22.06.2015 No. 614 “About features of creation of territories of the advancing social and economic development in territories of monoprofile municipal units of the Russian Federation (monotowns)”. According to the data at the beginning of 2020, the results of creating territories of advanced socio-economic development in Russia were: – A total of 86 territories of advanced socio-economic development were created, of which 19 territories in the Far East; – 370 residents of territories of advanced socio-economic development; – 14,000 jobs have been created; – 24.2 billion rubles of investments were attracted; – 56 infrastructure facilities have been established. – resident revenue amounted to more than 67 billion rubles. 5 territories of advanced socio-economic development were selected to conduct this research. These territories were created by one of the first in Russia, and therefore, at present, their development results are most clearly visible on their example. They are summarized in Table 1. Since there are practically no separate statistics on the territories of advanced socio-economic development, in this work they are studied as part of the regions of Russia, in which they are included on the basis of regional statistics using the method of correlation analysis. In accordance with the materials of Chaps. 1–3 of this book, manifestations of the sustainable development of regions in which 5 selected

80

O. V. Takhumova et al.

Table 1 Summary of 5 selected territories of advanced socio-economic development in Russia in 2020 Territory (region)

Name of the territory of advanced socio-economic development (district/city)

Date of creation of the territory of advanced socio-economic development

Number of priority activities in the territory of advanced socio-economic development, pcs

Jobs created, number of people

Capital investments, mln RUB (excluding VAT)

Republic of Tatarstan

Naberezhnye Chelny

28.01.2016

26

10

2.5

Rostov region

Gukovo

28.01.2016

29

10

5

Irkutsk region

Usolye-Sibirskoye 26.02.2016

28

10

2.5

Kemerovo region

Ugra

07.07.2016

27

20

5

16.07.2016

22

20

5

Zabaykalsky Krasnokamensk region * Ratio

of monetary income of the population to the value of a fixed set of consumer goods and services according to the results of 2017 Source Compiled by the authors on the basis of the materials Correct solution (2020)

territories of advanced socio-economic development in Russia are located in 2020 are given in Table 2.

3 Results The results of the correlation analysis of the data from Tables 1 and 2 are illustrated in Fig. 1. As can be seen from Fig. 1, the correlation of the management factors of priority socio-economic development with the manifestations of their sustainable development is highly differentiated, which does not allow to distinguish the key factor and requires multifactorial management, for the basis of which we refer to the detailed results of the correlation analysis in Table 3. As it can be seen from Table 3, in general, the number of priority activities (total correlation 182.53) most affects the sustainability of the territories of advanced socioeconomic development, since it determines the level of competition. In the internal structure of sustainability, the number of priority activities is also a key factor in human development (90.87) and economic security (56.96). It is noteworthy that management factors such as the number of activities (34.70) and capital investments (31.36) are almost equivalent to ecology.

3.1

2.7

3.7

Rostov region 0.394

Irkutsk region 0.358

0.352

0.373

Kemerovo region

Zabaykalsky region

1.70

1.74

1.63

1.91

2.51

4.5

10.5

14.1

32.1

33.7

257,398.00 10,374.00

20,859.60 −2038.20

56,587.00 233,234.00

1465.40

314,185.00

−895.40

13,650.40

Business balance, million rubles

257,206.58

341,243.32

48,228.70

337,056.59

537,467.19

GRP per capita, rub

6.11

1.75

6.69

6.87

3.77

Economic growth (%)

44

53

40

56

54

Ecological index (%)

Ecology

Source: compiled by authors on the basis of materials Green patrol (2020), Institute of scientific communications (2020), RiaReyting (2020), Rosstat (2020)

3.7

2.0

Admission to universities, thousands of people

Regional budget balance, mln RUB

Standard of living of the population*

Gini coefficient (the smaller the better)

Labor market tension ratio (the smaller the better)

Economic security

Human development

0.395

Republic of Tatarstan

Territory (region)

Table 2 Manifestations of sustainable development of regions in which there are 5 selected territories of advanced socio-economic development in Russia in 2020

Prospects for Ensuring the Sustainability of Territories … 81

82

O. V. Takhumova et al. Gini coefficient Environmental index

Economic growth

GRP per capita Business Balance

correlation with number of activities

Labour market tension ratio

Standard of living of the population

University admissions Regional budget balance

correlation with jobs created

correlation with capital investments Fig. 1 Generalized results of correlation analysis

Qualitative interpretation of the obtained results of correlation (quantitative) analysis allows to give the SWOT-analysis of ensuring the stability of the territories of advanced socio-economic development (Table 4). As it is indicated in Table 4, the prerequisites for ensuring the stability of the territories of advanced socio-economic development are the clear severity of social and environmental problems with a small scale of the territory (in small cities) and social tasks are included in the project of advanced socio-economic development of the territory. The problems of ensuring the stability of the territories of advanced socioeconomic development are connected with the fact that in the project of advanced socio-economic development of the territory, the interests of accelerating economic growth come to the fore, as well as with the monopoly position of business in a single-industry town. Prospects for ensuring the sustainability of the territories of advanced socioeconomic development are associated with the development of corporate social responsibility, the formation of a competitive market environment, as well as with the innovative development of the territory. The threat to ensuring the sustainability of territories of advanced socio-economic development is the deepening contradiction between economic growth and sustainable development of the territory, as well as the institutionalization of unsustainable development practices.

4 Conclusion The results of the research showed that the prospects for ensuring the sustainability of the territories of advanced socio-economic development are associated with the development of competition, increased innovation and increased corporate social responsibility. To this end, a set of framework measures is recommended for practical implementation, including expanding the list of priority activities, regulatory

3.47(+)

−31.88(+)

83.71

87.52

Human development: 9.64

−9.64 (+)

Human development: 54.64

−54.64 (+)

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

Capital investments

The created jobs

4.28

Number of types of activity

Standard of living of the population

Labour market tension ratio

55.52(+)

University admissions

−43.94

−45.48

−34.09

−79.55

Human development: 31.88 + 3.47 + 55.52 = 90.87

Gini coefficient

Correlation (%)

Table 3 Detailed results of correlation analysis

35.04(+)

−9.88

GRP per capita

5.11(+)

Economic growth

34.70(+)

Ecological index

−27.79

−68.23

5.89 (+)

−2.59

−7.91

−45.63

Economic security: 2.08 + 5.89 = 7.97

2.08 (+)

Economic security: 25.26

25.26 (+)

Ecology: 31.36

31.36 (+)

Ecology: 0

−11.76

Economic security: 16.81 + 35.04 + 5.11 = 56.96 Ecology: 34.70

16.81(+)

Balance of Balance of the business regional budget

9.64 + 7.97 + 31.36 = 48.97

54.64 + 25.26 = 79.90

90.87 + 56.96 + 34.70 = 182.53

Integral influence (sum of correlation coefficients modulo)

Prospects for Ensuring the Sustainability of Territories … 83

84

O. V. Takhumova et al.

Table 4 SWOT analysis of ensuring the sustainability of territories of advanced socio-economic development S

Prerequisites – The apparent severity of social and environmental problems on a small scale (in small towns); – Social tasks are included in the project of advanced socio-economic development of the Territory

W Problems

– In the project of advanced socio-economic development of the Territory, the interests of accelerating economic growth come to the fore; – Monopoly position of business in single-industry conditions

O Prospects

– Development of corporate social responsibility; – Formation of competitive market environment; – Innovative development of the Territory

T

– Deepening the contradiction between economic growth and sustainable development of the Territory; – Institutionalization of unsustainable development practices

Threats

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

regulation of competition (antimonopoly regulation), as well as attracting capital investments in the implementation of “green” investment and innovation projects.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Industry Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Gusakov N, Ganeeva M, Dyuzheva N (2019) Common industrial policy as a factor of the development of integration processes in the EAEU. Econ Policy Emerg Econ 12(4) Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of Elinor Ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L, Tendedziso L, Mwanaumo E, Musonda N, Mambwe M (2020) Determinants of the petroleum fuel supply chain performance in Zimbabwe: a case of the national oil infrastructure company. In: Aigbavboa C, Thwala W (eds) The construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. CIDB 2019. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_58

Prospects for Ensuring the Sustainability of Territories …

85

Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “interactive statistics and intelligent analytics of the balanced state of the regional economy of russia in terms of big data and blockchain—2020”. https://archilab.online/en/data/date-set-on-the-regional-economy (data accessed: 04.05.2020) Ivanov O, Zavyalova E, Ryazantsev S (2019) Public-private partnership in the countries of the eurasian economic union. Central Asia and the Caucasus. Eng Ed 2(2):33–47 Kozlova EP (2018) Analiz sovremennikh tendenciu i prognozov razvitiya ekonomiki. [Analysis of current trends and forecasts of economic development.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/586-analiz-sov remennykh-tendentsij-i-prognozov-razvitiya-ekonomiki (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Kuznetsov VP (2018) Ocenka sovremennogo sostoyaniya i prognozov obespecheniya ekonomicheskoi bezopasnosi promishlennogo predpriyatiya [Assessment of the current state and forecasts of ensuring the economic security of an industrial enterprise.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/585-otsenkasovremennogo-sostoyaniya-i-prognozov-obespecheniya-ekonomicheskoj-bezopasnosti-promys hlennogo-predpriyatiya (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Ministerstvo ekonomicheskogo razvvitiya (2020) Territoriya operezhauchevo razvititaa [Ministry of economic development of the Russian federation (2020). Territory of advanced development.] https://economy.gov.ru/material/directions/regionalnoe_razvitie/instrumenty_razvitiya_ territoriy/tor/ (data accessed: 04.05.2020) Petrenko E, Stolyarov N (2019) Features of the management of international projects, taking into account intercultural differences of the partners. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(4):2037–2051. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(34) Pichkov OB (2016) Social inequality in the US and Canada. Int Trends (Mezhdunarodnye protsessy), 2(3):85–92 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety versus rationality. Springer International Publishing Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human capital and AI in industry 4.0. Convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. J Intell Cap (In press, 2020) Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pozdnyakova WA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018) Genezis revolucionnogo perehoda k industrii 4.0 v 21 veke i kontrast s prediduschimi promishlennimi revoluciyami. [The genesis of the revolutionary transition to industry 4.0 in the 21st century and the contrast with previous industrial revolutions.] In: Popkova EG (eds). INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic

86

O. V. Takhumova et al.

seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https:// archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/587-genezis-revolyutsionnogo-perekhodak-industrii-4-0-v-xxi-veke-i-kontrast-s-predydushchimi-promyshlennymi-revolyutsiyami (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Pritvorova T, Tasbulatova B, Petrenko E (2018) Possibilities of blitz-psychograms as a tool for human resource management in the supporting system of hardiness of company. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues 6(2):840–853. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.2(25) Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019) Top-priority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 RiaReiting (2020) Reiting socialno-ekonomicheskogo pologeniya regionov Rossii. [RiaRating (2020). Rating of the socio-economic situation of the regions of Russia.] https://riarating.ru/ infografika/20180523/630091878.html (data accessed: 04.05.2020) Rosstat (2020) Regioni Rossii. Socialno-ekonomicheskie pokazateli [Federal state statistics service (2020). Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indexes.] https://www.gks.ru/bgd/regl/b18_14p/ Main.htm (data accessed: 04.50.2020) Sergi BS (2003) Economic Dynamics in transitional economies: the four-P governments, the EU enlargement, and the Bruxelles Consensus. Routledge, New York Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Sozinova AA, Fetisova OV (2019a) Modeling Russian industrial, tech, and financial cooperation with the Asia-Pacific Region. In: Sergi BS (ed) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, pp 195–223 Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63 Zeleniy patrul (2020) [Green Patrol (2020) Ecological rating of regions of Russia.] https://greenp atrol.ru/ru/stranica-dlya-obshchego-reytinga/ekologicheskiy-reyting-subektov-rf?tid=368 (data accessed: 04.05.2020)

Eco-Oriented Economy as a Tool to Improve the Quality of Life: Prospects and Opportunities in the Context of Digitalization Elmira K. Salakhova , Mariya V. Grenaderova , and Visita A. Hamzatov Abstract Purpose: The purpose of the work is to test the hypothesis and justify the prospects of using digitalization opportunities to improve the quality of life based on the construction of an eco-oriented economy, as well as the specificity of the management models of this process in developed and developing countries. Design/methodology/approach: The work uses a correlation analysis method, which identifies, firstly, the impact of an eco-oriented (green) economy on the quality of life. Secondly, the influence of various manifestations (sub-indices) of digitalization on the eco-oriented (“green”) development of the economy is determined. The study is conducted separately in developed countries (using the example of OECD countries that showed the highest quality of life in 2020) and in developing countries (using the example of BRICS countries) in 2020. Findings: An eco-oriented economy in developed countries has been identified as an effective tool for improving the quality of life, while in developing countries the application of this tool is much less effective or even counterproductive (a decrease in the quality of life). In both categories of countries, significant prospects and opportunities for activating this tool in the context of digitalization were identified, but different approaches were recommended for this. Originality/value: It has been proved that in developed countries the improvement of the quality of life on the basis of an eco-oriented economy in the context of digitalization is carried out in accordance with the integration model, and in developing countries in accordance with the fragmentation model. Taking into account the features of these models identified and described in this work will improve the

E. K. Salakhova (B) Astrakhan State Technical University, Astrakhan, Russia e-mail: [email protected] M. V. Grenaderova Ammosov North-Eastern Federal University (NEFU), Yakutsk, Russia e-mail: [email protected] V. A. Hamzatov Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_9

87

88

E. K. Salakhova et al.

practice of public management of quality of life, eco-oriented economic development and digitalization, as well as ensure the achievement of the systemic effect of these processes. Keywords Eco-oriented economy · Quality of life · Digitalization · Green economy · Combating climate change · Sustainable development · Developed countries · Developing countries JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction The global sustainable development goals adopted by the UN in 2015 combined social progress and environmental protection into a single set of human priorities. This means that at the level of normative economic theory, the fight against climate change is officially recognized as a significant measure towards improving the quality of life. At the same time, two problems arise at the level of positive economic theory. The first problem is that, in practice, not all green initiatives automatically lead to improved quality of life. The concept of quality of life is flexible, and its essence is determined by the social environment in which it is realized. This is due to the fact that in the pyramid of needs (developed by A. Maslow), the environment does not belong to the basic level (need for food, housing, security), but to one of the higher levels, and its exact position depends on the values of society. Therefore, if the needs of lower levels are not met, the positive effect of environmental improvement on quality of life is not extracted or weakly expressed. And on the contrary, when the needs of previous levels are fully satisfied, the contribution of environmental protection to improving the quality of life is especially sought after and strongly expressed. The second problem is the uncertainty of the mechanisms for managing ecooriented economic development in order to improve the quality of life. The most obvious and historical mechanism—corporate environmental responsibility—lends itself insufficiently to public administration and has a differential impact on the environment depending on the nature of responsibility (true or false, strong or weak). It is therefore necessary to find more modern and universal mechanisms that are more manageable. On the basis of these problems, the working hypothesis of this study is that in developed and developing countries the impact of climate change on the quality of life is fundamentally different from each other. A promising mechanism for managing this process is digitalization, but its application should take into account the specifics of the economic system. The aim of the work is to test the hypothesis and justify the prospects of using digitalization opportunities to improve the quality of life based

Eco-Oriented Economy as a Tool to Improve the Quality of Life …

89

on the construction of an eco-oriented economy, as well as the specificity of the management models of this process in developed and developing countries.

2 Materials and Method The general provisions of the concept of sustainable development and their corresponding contribution of eco-oriented economics to improving the quality of life are reflected in the works of Andronova et al. (2019), Frolov et al. (2017), Haabazoka (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2020), Sergi et al. (2019), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017). Opportunities for a sustainable digitalization economy are reflected in the publications of Shulus et al. (2020), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Popkova (2019), Popkova et al. (2018, 2019), Popkova and Gulzat (2020a, b), Popkova and Zmiyak (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2019, 2020), Sergi et al. (2019b, b), Sergi (2003, 2019), Kuznetsov (2018), Kozlova (2018), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018). Nevertheless, despite the multiplicity of existing publications on a given problem, it has been studied fragmentally and needs further systemic research. To do this, this work uses the correlation analysis method, which identifies, firstly, the impact of an eco-oriented (green) economy on the quality of life. Secondly, the influence of various manifestations (sub-indices) of digitalization on the eco-oriented (“green”) development of the economy is determined. The study is conducted separately in developed countries (on the example of OECD countries that demonstrated the highest quality of life in 2020) and in developing countries (on the example of BRICS countries) in 2020. The statistical base of the study is given in Table 1.

3 Results Based on the data from Table 1, the average quality of life and green economy and their average correlation in developed and developing countries are calculated, as shown graphically in Fig. 1. As it can be seen from Fig. 1, the average life quality in OECD countries is very high at 188.96 points. In BRICS countries, this figure is 41.64% lower and averages 110.27 points. Differences in the level of development of the green economy are much less pronounced: its average (multiplied by 100) in OECD countries is 67.61 points (that is, 0.6761), and in BRICS countries—49.67 points (that is, 0.4967). The correlation of the quality of life index and the green economy index in OECD countries is 85.15%, and in BRICS countries—39.42%. This shows that in developed countries, eco-oriented economies are actively used as a tool to improve the quality of

90

E. K. Salakhova et al.

Table 1 Eco-oriented economy, quality of life and digitalization statistics in developed and developing countries in 2020 Category

Country

Quality of life index, points 1–200

Countries Denmark 192.67 OECD Switzerland 192.01

Green economy index, shares from 1

Sub-indices of digital competitiveness, points 1–100 Knowledge index (“know-ledge”)

Technology Future index readiness (“techno-logy”) index (“future readiness”)

0.6800

85.987

83.958

84.519

0.7594

90.850

84.292

87.593

Finland

190.22

0.6997

84.462

86.971

88.552

Austria

186.21

0.6479

83.831

70.976

77.401

Netherlands 183.67 Countries Brazil BRICS Roll

0.5937

81.807

88.413

91.352

105.65

0.5417

45.742

49.166

55.919

102.81

0.5531

78.067

72.856

80.743

India

108.63

0.5398

63.721

54.978

54.946

Russia

102.31

0.4115

75.017

58.451

56,539

South Africa

131.97

0.4376

52.148

53.647

55.588

Source Compiled by authors based on materials Dual Citizen (2020), IMD (2020), Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), Numbeo (2020)

300.00 188.96

200.00 100.00

85.15

-39.42

0.00 -100.00

110.27

67.61

OECD countries

49.67

BRICS countries

Correlation of Quality of Life Index and Green Economy Index,% Average quality of life, points 1-200 Average green economy index (* 100), points 1-100 Fig. 1 Average quality of life and green economy and their average correlation in developed and developing countries. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

life, and in developing countries the application of this tool is difficult (not well established). To identify the prospects for using digitalization in this process, consider the correlation of the green economy index with sub-indices of digital competitiveness (Fig. 2). As it is shown in Fig. 2, OECD countries have the highest correlation of the green economy index with the knowledge index (92.64%). The correlation with the

Eco-Oriented Economy as a Tool to Improve the Quality of Life …

100.00 50.00 0.00 -50.00

91

92.64 5.76

-0.87

-7.43

OECD countries

21.92

44.31

BRICS countries

Knowledge Index ("knowledge") Technology Index ("technology") Future readiness index (“future readiness”) Fig. 2 Correlation of green economy index with digital competitiveness sub-indices, %. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

technology index is small, but positive (5.76%), and with the future readiness index negative, which indicates its negative impact on the eco-oriented development of the economies of developed countries. Therefore, in developed countries, digital education, high-tech professions and the development of education and the labour market play a key role. In the BRICS countries, the correlation of the green economy index with the knowledge index is negative (−7.43), which indicates the exact opposite of the practice of building an eco-oriented economy in developing countries to the practice implemented in developed countries. The correlation with the technology index is moderate (21.92%), and with the future readiness index is highest (44.31%). Therefore, in developing countries, access to and use of advanced digital technologies is of paramount importance for eco-oriented economic development. Based on the established distinctive features (Figs. 1 and 2), we have identified models of eco-oriented development of the economy in order to improve the quality of life in digitalization conditions, the comparative analysis of which is made in Table 2. As it is shown in the Table 2, the environment for implementing an integration model in which eco-oriented development is integrated with quality of life is the developed countries. The social environment for the implementation of this model is a developed responsible society. The impact of the green economy on quality of life is clear and positive: the quality of life is improved by the green economy. The key component of the digital economy is a digital society (“knowledge”). The role of digitalization in the eco-oriented development of the economy lies in technological support for the development of a responsible society. Developing countries are the environment for implementing a fragmented model in which eco-oriented development is somewhat separate from the quality of life and their relationship is more complex and less pronounced. The social environment for implementing this model is an emerging society. The impact of a green economy on quality of life is much less pronounced and may even be negative: a green economy reduces quality of life. The key component of the digital economy is the active use of digital technologies (“technology”). The role of digitalization in eco-oriented

92

E. K. Salakhova et al.

Table 2 Comparative analysis of eco-oriented economic development models to improve the quality of life in a digitalized environment Criterion of comparison

Integration model

Fragmentational model

Model Implementation Environment

The developed countries

Developing countries

Social environment

A developed responsible society

An emerging liability company

Impact of green economy on quality of life

Quality of life is improved

“Green” economy

Key component of the digital economy

At the expense of the green economy

Reduces quality of life

The role of digitalization in eco-oriented economic development

Digital society (“knowledge”) Active use of digital technologies (“technology”)

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

economic development lies in technological support for the introduction of green innovations.

4 Conclusion At the end of the research, we want to note that the hypothesis put forward received scientific evidence. In developed countries, an eco-oriented economy is an effective tool for improving the quality of life, while in developing countries the application of this tool is much less effective or even causes the opposite effect (a decrease in the quality of life). In both categories of countries, significant prospects and opportunities for activating this tool in the context of digitalization were identified, but different approaches were recommended for this. In developed countries, improving the quality of life based on an eco-oriented economy in the context of digitalization is carried out in accordance with the integration model, and in developing countries in accordance with the fragmentation model. Taking into account the features of these models identified and described in this work will improve the practice of public management of quality of life, ecooriented economic development and digitalization, as well as ensure the achievement of the systemic effect of these processes.

Eco-Oriented Economy as a Tool to Improve the Quality of Life …

93

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Starostin VS, Degtereva (2019) Study of sector-specific innovation efforts: the case from Russian economy. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship Sustain Center 7(1):540–552 Dual Citizen (2020) The global green economy index. https://dualcitizeninc.com/global-green-eco nomy-index/index.php#interior_section_link (data accessed: 04.05.2020) Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (ed) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham, Online. ISBN 978-3-030-001025, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 IMD (2020) World digital competitiveness ranking 2019. https://www.imd.org/wcc/worldcompetitiveness-center-rankings/world-digital-competitiveness-rankings-2019/ (data accessed: 04.05.2020) Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020”. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set (data accessed: 04.05.2020) Kozlova EP (2018) Analiz sovremennikh tendenciy i prognozov razvitiya ekonomiki. [Analysis of current trends and forecasts of economic development.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/586-analiz-sov remennykh-tendentsij-i-prognozov-razvitiya-ekonomiki (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Kuznetsov VP (2018) Ocenka sovremennogo sosotoyaniya i prognozov obespecheniya ekonomicheskoi bezopasnosti promishlennogo predpriyatiya [Assessment of the current state and forecasts of ensuring the economic security of an industrial enterprise.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/585otsenka-sovremennogo-sostoyaniya-i-prognozov-obespecheniya-ekonomicheskoj-bezopasno sti-promyshlennogo-predpriyatiya (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Numbeo (2020) Quality of life index for country 2019 mid-year. https://www.numbeo.com/qualityof-life/rankings_by_country.jsp (data accessed: 04.05.2020) Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Issues 7(4):781–791. https://www.researchg

94

E. K. Salakhova et al.

ate.net/publication/326001978_Sustainable_developmet_processes_Service_sector_in_post-ind ustrial_economy Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG (2019) Preconditions of formation and development of industry 4.0 in the conditions of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169(1):65–72 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020a) Technological revolution in the 21st century: digital society versus artificial intelligence. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 91, pp 339–345 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020b) Contradiction of the digital economy: public well-being versus cyber threats. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 87, pp 112–124 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety versus rationality. Springer International Publishing Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human capital and AI in industry 4.0. Convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. J Intell Capital. (In press) Popkova EG, Zmiyak KV (2019) Priorities of training of digital personnel for industry 4.0: social competencies versus technical competencies. On the Horizon 27(3–4):138–144 Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Morozova IA, Litvinova TN (2018) Transformational processes in the media system under industry conditions 4.0: future outlines and perspectives (reflections on the article by Alexander P. Sukhodolov, DSc. In Economics, Professor and Irina A. Kuznetsova, PhD in Engineering, Associate Professor “Designing the mass media as a homeostatic system by means of automation engineering: Basic concepts, structure, components”). Theor Pract Issues Journal 7(1):145–154 Popkova EG, Egorova EN, Popova E, Pozdnyakova UA (2019) The model of state management of economy on the basis of the internet of things. Stud Comput Intell 826:1137–1144 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (eds) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova WA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018) Genezis revoluzionnogo perehoda k industrii 4.0 v 21 veke i kontrast s prediduschimi promishlennimi revoluciyami. [The genesis of the revolutionary transition to industry 4.0 in the 21st century and the contrast with previous industrial revolutions. In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.”] https:// archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/587-genezis-revolyutsionnogo-perekhodak-industrii-4-0-v-xxi-veke-i-kontrast-s-predydushchimi-promyshlennymi-revolyutsiyami (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Sergi BS (2003) Economic Dynamics in transitional economies: the four-P governments, the EU enlargement, and the Bruxelles Consensus. Routledge, New York Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Bogoviz AV, Litvinova TN (2019) Understanding industry 4.0: AI, the internet of things, and the future of work. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK

Eco-Oriented Economy as a Tool to Improve the Quality of Life …

95

Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 92, pp 353–359 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented Sustainable Development Goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Formation of an Effective System of Extended Reproduction in Agriculture as a Prerequisite for the Sustainable Development of the Agricultural Sector of the Economy Zoya Sh. Babaeva, Vladimir G. Shirobokov , and Sabina S. Ramazanova Abstract Purpose: The purpose of the work is to identify prospects for an effective system of expanded agricultural reproduction for the sustainable development of the agricultural sector of the economy. Design/methodology/approach: To measure the effectiveness of the extended reproduction system in agriculture, an author’s methodological approach has been developed, within the framework of which an evaluation formula and a scale are proposed to interpret the effectiveness of extended reproduction in agriculture. Findings: The authors conducted an applied research of the effectiveness of the system of extended reproduction in agriculture at the level of the global agricultural sector. Statistics for 2019–2020 were analyzed and the effectiveness of extended reproduction in agriculture was evaluated using the author’s methodological approach. Alternative approaches to expanded reproduction in agriculture were identified and their comparative analysis from the point of view of efficiency was carried out using the Game Theory methodology. Originality/value: Thus, the formation of an effective system of expanded reproduction in agriculture as a prerequisite for the sustainable development of the agricultural sector of the economy involves a transition to the path of intensive development of this sector. The current extensive development of agriculture causes a decrease in its commercial attractiveness and is associated with negative efficiency (0.97 in 2020). To increase efficiency, the modernization of the agricultural sector based on digital technologies is recommended. Thanks to this, a new source of expanded reproduction will be available - increasing the productivity of agriculture based on automation. This will increase efficiency to 1.44. Z. Sh. Babaeva (B) Dagestan State University of National Economy, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] V. G. Shirobokov Voronezh State Agrarian University Named After Emperor Peter the Great, Voronezh, Russia e-mail: [email protected] S. S. Ramazanova Dagestan State Agrarian University Named After M.M. Dzhambulatov, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_10

97

98

Z. Sh. Babaeva et al.

Keywords Efficiency · System of extended reproduction · Agriculture · Sustainable development · The agricultural sector of the economy JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Increased agricultural reproduction is necessary to achieve sustainable development goals, specifically Goal 2, “Eradicating hunger”, and indirectly Goal 1, “Eradicating poverty”, and Goal 3, “Good health and well-being.” These problems are exacerbated in the modern world economy and need to be addressed as a matter of priority. The current concept of the development of the agricultural sector of the global economy is focused only on the goal of eliminating hunger. This implies a desire to increase food production, regardless of how it is achieved. This concept lays the foundation for the extensive development of agriculture, which is associated with two risks of transferring agriculture from the category of commercial activity to the category of non-commercial activity. While maintaining the current technological order, the increase in agricultural production is possible only through the attraction of large resources. The peculiarity of the agricultural sector of the economy, consisting in its strong dependence on the unpredictable and unmanageable (with the current technological layout) natural factor, does not allow to derive advantages from “economies of scale”. In this regard, in order to guarantee stable growth in agricultural production under adverse environmental conditions (for example, a decrease in land yields due to growing production and consumption wastes and climate change) and the inability to increase the volume of natural resources (due to a shortage of land suitable for agriculture), a multiple increase in technological (units of agricultural equipment) and human (agricultural workers) resources is necessary. The process described will cause not only an overall increase in the resource intensity of agriculture, but also an increase in marginal costs. Against the background of intensive urbanization, which has been going on for many decades, as well as today’s low investment attractiveness of the agricultural sector of the economy, this will finally undermine the competitiveness of agriculture as a commercial activity. The result will be a violation of the sustainability of the agricultural sector, the establishment of its subsidized dependence and its transition to public administration, which in the future can lead to an even greater decrease in the effectiveness and unattainability of the initial goal of overcoming hunger. Thus, it is important to develop an alternative scientific concept covering the full range of sustainable development goals set for modern agriculture and ensuring its transition to an intensive development path that allows it to maintain and increase its commercial attractiveness and competitiveness, thereby maintaining its sustainability. The aim of this work is to identify prospects for an effective

Formation of an Effective System of Extended Reproduction in Agriculture …

99

system of expanded agricultural reproduction for the sustainable development of the agricultural sector of the economy.

2 Materials and Method The contribution of agriculture to the practical realization of global sustainable development goals is discussed in the publications of Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Inshakov et al. (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2017, 2020), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020a, b), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2017), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Popkova (2017). The sustainable development of the agricultural sector of the economy is discussed in the works of Ali Kamil et al. (2019), Andronova et al. (2019a, b), Ragulina and Bratarchuk (2019), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018a, b, c). At the same time, the problem of forming an effective system of extended reproduction in agriculture is not sufficiently studied and requires further study. To assess the effectiveness of the extended reproduction system in agriculture, this study developed an author’s methodological approach, based on the following formula: EERagr = (Ver/Iar) ∗ Qfp,

(1)

where EERagr—this is the efficiency of extended reproduction in agriculture; Ver—this is the volume of expanded reproduction calculated as the ratio of production in the current period to its value in the previous period; Iar—this is an increase in the amount of resources involved in agriculture, calculated as the ratio of resources used in the current period to resources used in the previous period; Qfp—this is an increase in the quality of food products, calculated as the ratio of quality in the current period to quality in the previous period. A special scale (Table 1) has been developed to interpret the obtained ERVsx values.

3 Results In this work, applied research is carried out on the effectiveness of the system of extended reproduction in agriculture at the level of the global agricultural sector.

100

Z. Sh. Babaeva et al.

Table 1 Scale for the interpretation of the effectiveness of extended reproduction in agriculture (EERagr) Interval

Understanding the Effectiveness of Advanced Reproduction

EERagr < 0

Negative efficiency, expanded reproduction is not justified: unprofitable, burdensome for the economy

EERagr = 0 Zero efficiency, expanded reproduction is justified only from the point of view of public benefit, but not economic EERagr > 0

Positive efficiency, expanded reproduction is justified from the standpoint of both social and economic benefits EERagr the higher, the better

Source Developed and compiled by the authors 800.00 600.00

584.75

519.71

400.00 200.00

37.42

27.04

37.43

26.64

0.00 2019

2020

Agricultural machinery, tractors per 100 square meters. m km of arable land Agricultural land,% of land area Employment in agriculture, 5 employment (modelled by the International Labour Organization)

Fig. 1 Amount of resources involved in agriculture in 2019–2020. Source Compiled by authors based on materials World Bank (2020)

Figures 1, 2 and 3 shows the most up-to-date statistics that allow you to evaluate efficiency using the author’s methodological approach. Based on the data in Fig. 1, we estimate the increase in the volume of resources involved in agriculture in 2020 compared to 2019. We use the arithmetic average of resources of all types: Iar = (584.75/519.71 + 37.43/37.42 + 26.64/27.04)/3 = (1.13 + 1.00 + 0.99)/3 = 1.04. Consequently, in 2020 there was an increase in the volume of resources in the agricultural sector of the global economy by 4%. Based on the data in Fig. 2, we estimate the volume of expanded reproduction in agriculture, in 2020 compared to 2019. We use the arithmetic average of all food products: Ver = (118, 88/117, 85 + 128, 11/125, 46 + 125, 60/123, 77)/3

Formation of an Effective System of Extended Reproduction in Agriculture …

128.11

130.00

125.46

125.00 120.00

123.77

101

125.60

118.88

117.85

115.00 110.00 2019

2020

Livestock Production Index (2004-2006 = 100) Crop Production Index (2004-2006 = 100) Food production index (2004-2006 = 100) Fig. 2 Volume of extended reproduction in agriculture in 2019–2020. Source Compiled by authors based on materials World Bank (2020)

80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00

71.60 58.30

74.80 64.95

64.50 54.20

2019 Nicaragua (largest recession)

2020 Kuwait (largest increase)

Global Economy Average

Fig. 3 Quality of food products in 2019–2020. Source Compiled by authors based on materials The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited (2020)

= 1, 01 + 1, 02 + 1, 01)/3 = 1, 01. Consequently, in 2020 there was an increase in production in the agricultural sector of the global economy by 1%. Due to the fact that information on the quality of agricultural products is given only by country, to determine the global situation, we found an arithmetic average in the country that showed the largest decline in 2020 compared to 2019 (Nicaragua), and in the country that showed the largest increase in food quality (Kuwait). Based on the data in Fig. 3, we estimate the increase in the quality of agricultural products in 2020 compared to 2019: Qfp = 64.50/64.95 = 0.99. Consequently, quality has decreased by 1%. The calculations make it possible to calculate the effectiveness of extended reproduction in agriculture: EERagr = (1.01/1.04) * 0.99 = 0.97. The obtained value of

102

Z. Sh. Babaeva et al.

the EERagr indicator indicates commercial non-attractiveness (negative efficiency) of extended reproduction in the agricultural sector. We also calculate labor productivity: Ver/Iar = 1.01/1.04 = 0.97 (low indicator). To determine the prospects for solving the identified problem, consider alternative approaches to extended reproduction in agriculture and conduct their comparative analysis from the point of view of efficiency using the Game Theory methodology (Table 2). As it can be seen from Table 2, three alternative approaches to extended agricultural reproduction are possible. The first approach involves the modernization of the agricultural sector based on digital technologies. The source of extended reproduction in this case is an increase in the productivity of agriculture based on automation. The efficiency is 1.44. The second approach involves supporting agriculture, stimulating the flow of resources. The source of expanded reproduction in this case is the growth of resource supply (production capacity) of agriculture. Efficiency is 1.19. The third approach Table 2 Alternative approaches to extended reproduction in agriculture and their comparative performance analysis using game theory methodology Comparative Approach 1: Reliance on characteristic high technology

Approach 2: Prioritizing resources

Approach 3: Mass production

Essence of approach

Modernization of the agricultural sector based on digital technologies

Supporting agriculture, stimulating resource flows

Change of standards of food

Source of expanded reproduction

Increasing agricultural productivity based on automation

Increasing resource availability (production capacity) of agriculture

Increased Technology-Based Performance

Volume of expanded reproduction (Ver), 2020: 1.01

1.01 * 1.5 = 1.515

Increase of volume in resources (Iar), 2020: 1.04

1.04

1.04 * 1.25 = 1.3

Increased quality of food products (Qfp), 2020: 0.99

0.99

0.99

0.70

(1.561/1.3) = 0.99 = 1.19

(2.02/1.04) = 0.80 = 1.36

Ver/Iar = 1.3 * 0.97 1.515/1.04 = 1.261 = = 1.46

Efficiency of (1.515/1.04) * 0.99 = 1.44 expanded reproduction (EERagr), 2020: 0.97

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

Ver/Iar = 1.01 * 2 = 2.02 1.01//1.04 = = 1.261/1.3 = 0.97 1.04

Ver/Iar = 2.02/1.04 = = 1.94

Formation of an Effective System of Extended Reproduction in Agriculture …

103

involves changing food standards. The source of advanced reproduction in this case is an increase in performance based on a technology change. Efficiency is 1.36. According to the performance criterion, the first approach is most preferable.

4 Conclusion Therefore, the formation of an effective system of expanded reproduction in agriculture as a prerequisite for the sustainable development of the agricultural sector of the economy involves a transition to the path of intensive development of this sector. The current extensive development of agriculture causes a decrease in its commercial attractiveness and is associated with negative efficiency (0.97 in 2020). In order to increase the efficiency, it is recommended to modernize the agricultural sector bases on digital technologies. Thanks to this, a new source of expanded reproduction will be available—increasing the productivity of agriculture based on automation. This will increase efficiency to 1.44.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Hakhalev VY, Hakhaleva SS (2020a) High-tech CluFigrs as a basis for improving the Russian defense industrial complex with respect to digitalization. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):221–226 Abdulkadyrov AS, Rykhtikova NA, Tarasov AI (2020b) Improving the functioning of high-tech sectors in the Russian national economy on the basis of cluster policy and in the conditions of digitization: perspectives from the defense industrial complex. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):509–515 Abdulkadyrov AS, Ryzhov IV, Strokov AI, Kamzolov YuV (2017) Current aspects of improving the organization of production of high-tech products. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):18–27 Ali Kamil M, Ragulina Y, Bratarchuk T (2019) Features of cooperation of the Russian federation and African countries in the agro-industrial complex. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science, p 0120930 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Belova IN, Yakimovich EA (2019a) Digital technology in the fishing sector: international and Russian experience. In: 1st international scientific conference on modern management trends and the digital economy—from regional development to global economic growth (MTDE). Proceedings of the 1st international scientific conference modern management trends and the digital economy: from regional development to global economic growth (MTDE 2019). Yekaterinburg, Russia. AEBMR-advances in economics business and management research, vol 81, pp 277–280 Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Degtereva EA, Zobov AM, Starostin VS (2019) Activity of Russian companies of the agri-food sector in regional industrial value-added chains. Adv Syst Sci Appl 19(1):31–43

104

Z. Sh. Babaeva et al.

Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of Elinor Pstrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 44, pp 135–148 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 15(2):589–597 Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Issues 7(4):781–791. Available at: https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/326001978_Sustainable_developmet_processes_Service_s ector_in_post-industrial_economy Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Pozdnyakova UA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018a) Industria 4.0 kak otrasl promishlennosti: ponyatie, suschnost, osobennosti [Industry 4.0 as a branch of industry: concept, essence, features.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/588-industriya-4-0-kak-otr asl-promyshlennosti-ponyatie-sushchnost-i-osobennosti (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Sorokina NA (2018b) Koncepciya ekonomiki znanii: fundamentalnie pologeniya i perspektivi realizacii v sovremennoi Rossii [The concept of the knowledge economy: fundamental positions and prospects for implementation in modern Russia.] In Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/589-kontseptsiya-ekonomiki-znanij-fundamentalnye-polozheniya-i-per spektivy-realizatsii-v-sovremennoj-rossii (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Yatsechko SS (2018c) Predposilki formirovaniya i razvitiya industrii 4.0 d usloviyah ekonomiki znanii [Prerequisites for formation and development of industry 4.0 in conditions of knowledge economy.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI AllRussian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of

Formation of an Effective System of Extended Reproduction in Agriculture …

105

the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/590-predposylki-formir ovaniya-i-razvitiya-industrii-4-0-v-usloviyakh-ekonomiki-znanij (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Ragulina Y, Bratarchuk T (2019) Conceptual problems of contemporary additional education in the agro-industrial complex: employers’ personnel strategies. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science, p 012102 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited (2020) Global food security index: rankings and trends. https://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Index (data accessed: 05.05.2020) World Bank (2020) Indicators: agriculture and rural development. https://data.worldbank.org/ind icator (data accessed: 05.05.2020) Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Features of Sustainable Development of Agro-Industrial Enterprises Under Sanctions Patimat D. Kamilova , Zaira M. Kamilova , and Elnara M. Eminova

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of the research is to study the features of the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises in the conditions of sanctions on the example of modern Russia. Design/methodology/approach: Sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises means their ability to show signs of stable (crisis-free) functioning and development—non-zero (positive) profit, profitability, value addition, sales volume. To study the features of the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises in the conditions of sanctions, the authors use methods of trend and correlation analysis of statistical data. To obtain the most complete and reliable information, the agro-industrial complex is considered in the context of its two key segments—agriculture and agricultural engineering (agricultural machinery production). Statistics on the selected segments of the agro-industrial complex of Russia for the period of sanctions (2014–2018) were investigated. Findings: The following features of the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises in the context of sanctions were identified. Firstly, the reorientation to the domestic market, as well as the transition of Russian agricultural export enterprises to alternative goods (export facilities) and other foreign trade partners. Secondly, active and highly efficient import substitution, which ensures the accelerated development of domestic entrepreneurship and its formation as a vector of growth of the Russian economy. Thirdly, the deterioration in the financial performance of Russian agro-industrial enterprises during the period of economic sanctions, indicating a violation of their stability, but subsequently replaced by stabilization (restoration of stability). Fourth, the accelerated modernization of agro-industrial enterprises and the establishment of their subsidiary dependence. Fifth, the increased complexity of managing the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises. Originality/value: The deterministic P. D. Kamilova (B) · Z. M. Kamilova · E. M. Eminova Dagestan State Agrarian University Named After M.M. Dzhambulatov, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Z. M. Kamilova e-mail: [email protected] E. M. Eminova e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_11

107

108

P. D. Kamilova et al.

features of Russian experience indicate that international trade and economic sanctions initially cause a moderate crisis of agro-industrial enterprises, but subsequently contribute to their sustainable development of domestic entrepreneurship both on the basis of the domestic market and on the basis of exports in new directions. The scale of benefits depends on the flexibility and adaptability of the enterprise. Keywords Features · Sustainable development · Enterprises · Agro-industrial complex (agrarian and industrial complex) · International economic (trade) sanctions · Modern Russia JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Agricultural development is an important part of the global sustainable development goals, as reflected, inter alia, in the formulation of the second stated goal of ending hunger. Nevertheless, the agro-industrial complex (agrarian and industrial complex) became one of those industries which fell under the international economic sanctions imposed at the end of 2014 and existing up to the present (middle of 2020). This demonstrates a clear contradiction between the declared humanistic values and actual political and economic interests in the modern global economic system. At the epicenter of the international sanctions process was Russia. In world science, the consequences of the introduction of multilateral sanctions measures for countries specializing in agriculture, to which these measures are applicable, have been studied in sufficient detail. In particular, we are talking about traditional European foreign trade partners of Russia, including Spain and Italy, as well as Turkey, which actively exported its agricultural products to Russian markets before the embargo. In existing publications, scientists agree that the agro-industrial enterprises of these countries were significantly affected by the sanctions, faced with a crisis of overproduction and the inability to redirect export flows to alternative host countries. At the same time, the consequences for Russian agro-industrial enterprises are much less studied and unambiguously not determined by economic science. These consequences may vary depending on the state of national food security in Russia and its management approach. On the one hand, with high dependence on food imports, agricultural sanctions in Russia could cause a food crisis (mass famine). On the other hand, with moderate dependence on imports and developed domestic entrepreneurship in the agro-industrial complex, it is possible not only to avoid the food crisis, but also to accelerate the growth and development of domestic agriculture, that is, to benefit from sanctions. The above points to the fact that modern Russia has unique experience in agricultural development, which is of interest to other countries of the world interested

Features of Sustainable Development of Agro-Industrial …

109

in improving the level of national food security and managing the risks of food sanctions. This purpose of this research is to study the features of the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises in the face of sanctions on the example of modern Russia.

2 Materials and Method The concept, the essence and the problem of sustainable development of agroindustrial enterprises and ways to solve it in modern conditions are disclosed in the publications of Ali Kamil et al. (2019), Andronova et al. (2019a, b), Ragulina and Bratarchuk (2019). A number of aspects of the impact of economic sanctions on agro-industrial enterprises are discussed in studies by Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Inshakov et al. (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2017, 2020), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018a, b, c), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017). In this work, the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises means their ability to demonstrate signs of stable (crisis-free) functioning and development—non-zero (positive) profit, profitability, value addition, sales volume. In order to study the features of sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises in conditions of sanctions, the methods of trend and correlation analysis of statistical data are used in this work. To obtain the most complete and reliable information, the agro-industrial complex is considered in the context of its two key segments—agriculture and agricultural engineering (agricultural machinery production). Statistics on the selected segments of the agro-industrial complex of Russia for the period of sanctions (2014–2018) are given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.

3 Results As a result of the systematic analysis of data from Tables 1 and 2, the following features of the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises in the conditions of sanctions were identified in this work. The first feature is the reorientation to the domestic market, as well as the transition of Russian agricultural export enterprises to alternative goods (export facilities) and other foreign trade partners. As shown in Table 2, the volume of the agricultural machine market in actual prices in 2018 (175 billion rubles) increased by 45.83% compared to 2015 (120 billion rubles). However, this trend is weak, as evidenced by the constant or even decrease in the volume of sales in natural units. In such a way, the sales of tractors for agricultural

110

P. D. Kamilova et al.

Table 1 Agricultural statistics in Russia during the period of international economic sanctions (2014–2018) Indicators

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Export of agricultural products, million dollars

18,981

16,215

17,074

20,702

24,921

Agricultural imports, millions of dollars

39,941

26,650

25,058

28,931

29,736

Foreign trade balance, million dollars

−230,959

−10,435

−7984

−8228

−4816

3362

3293

GDP created in agriculture, billion rubles n/d

n/d

Share of agriculture in real GDP, %

4.0

4.2

4.3

4.3

4.1

Dynamics of real GDP growth created in agriculture, %

7.9

2.4

2.3

1.5

−2.1

Agricultural profits, billions of dollars

3.18

2.01

2.17

1.61

1.87

Profitability of agricultural enterprises, % 18

16

11

13

13

Investments in fixed assets, billion rubles

n/d

219

623

706

777

Subsidies, billion rubles

n/d

222

218

234

248

Source Compiled by authors based on materials from Deloitte (2020)

Table 2 Statistics of agricultural engineering in Russia during the period of international economic sanctions (2014–2018) Indicator

2015

2016

2017

2018

The Volume of the market of agricultural machines in actual prices, billion rubles

120

151.9

177.3

175

Change in the market of agricultural machine of the Russian Federation in actual prices,% to the previous year

−4.8

25

+16.7

−1.3

Dynamics of tractor sales for agricultural works and forestry in the Russian Federation, thousand units

10.8

11.3

11.0

10.5

Dynamics of sales of combine harvesters in the Russian Federation, thousand units

5.3

6.2

6.2

5.2

Share of agricultural machinery imports in the agricultural machine market of the Russian Federation, %

60

46

44

40

Ratio of agricultural machine exports from Russia to domestic market sales, %

5.6

5.3

4.9

6.2

Machinery update rate (year value), %

3

3.3

3.6

3.4

Source Compiled by the authors on the basis of the materials of the National Research University “Higher School of Economics,” Development Center (2020)

work and forestry in Russia in 2018 amounted to 10.5 thousand units, which is even less than 2015, when they amounted to 10.8 thousand units. Similarly, sales of combine harvesters in Russia decreased from 5.3 thousand units in 2015 to 5.2 thousand units in 2018. At the same time, the ratio of agricultural machinery exports from Russia to sales in the domestic market increased from 5.6% in 2015 to 6.2% in 2018. According to

Features of Sustainable Development of Agro-Industrial …

111

Table 1, agricultural exports have also increased: from $18,981 million in 2014 to $24,921 million in 2018. Consequently, the sanctions measures did not create significant barriers to the development of Russian entrepreneurship in the agro-industrial complex, which increased production and increased the volume of sales of products in both allocated segments both in the domestic market and in export markets that did not fall under the sanctions. The second feature: active and highly effective import substitution, which ensures the accelerated development of domestic entrepreneurship. As can be seen from Table 1, imports of agricultural products decreased from $39,941 million in 2014 to $29,736 million in 2018, that is, by 50.58%. Table 2 indicates that the share of agricultural machinery imports in the Russian agricultural machinery market decreased from 60% in 2015 to 40% in 2018. According to Table 1, the foreign trade balance has also improved and it has been increasing from—230,959 million dollars in 2014 to—4816 million dollars in 2018. The share of agriculture in real GDP increased from 4.0% in 2014 to 4.1% in 2018. Nevertheless, the dynamics of real GDP growth created in agriculture turned out to be negative—it changed from 7.7% in 2014 to—2.1% in 2018. Consequently, thanks to the sanctions, the agro-industrial complex received an impetus to development and became a new vector of growth in the Russian economy, although the potential for the development of the agro-industrial complex was quickly exhausted (already in the first 5 years). A third feature: a deterioration in the financial performance of Russian agroindustrial enterprises during the period of economic sanctions which are indicating a violation of their stability, but subsequently replaced by stabilization (restoration of stability). As shown in Table 1, the profit of agricultural enterprises in 2014 was $3.18 billion. Under the pressure of sanctions in 2015, it fell to $2.17 billion, and in 2016 to $1.61 billion. Subsequently, its recovery is observed—in 2018, profit amounted to $2.01 billion. In the same way, the profitability of agricultural products in 2014 was 18%, in 2015 it fell to 16%, and in 2016 to 11%, but by 2018 it has increased to 13%. The fourth feature: accelerated modernization of agro-industrial enterprises and the establishment of their subsidiary dependence. As can be seen from Table 1, investments in fixed assets in agriculture have increased from 219 billion rubles in 2015 to 777 billion rubles in 2018. In Table 2 it is shown that the renewal rate of equipment in agricultural engineering increased from 3% in 2015 to 3.4% in 2018 (less pronounced effect). Table 1 also shows that the volume of subsidies (state financial support) of agricultural enterprises in 2018 amounted to 248 billion rubles, an increase of 11.71% compared to 2015, when it amounted to 222 billion rubles. A fifth feature: the increased complexity of managing the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises. For its consideration, refer to the correlation analysis in Figs. 1 and 2. As it can be seen from Fig. 1, subsidies and fixed investment increase the share of agriculture in real GDP, but worsen the rest of this segment of the AIC. Imports of agricultural products contribute to the growth of sales and profits in agriculture,

112

P. D. Kamilova et al.

150.00 99.99

100.00 57.68

99.99

71.78

50.00 0.00 -4.72 -50.00

-21.04 -40.15

-30.68 -56.74

-100.00

-84.17

-86.59 -90.72

-83.59

-92.13

-90.05

-76.11

-150.00

correlation with agricultural exports

correlation with agricultural imports

correlation with fixed investment

correlation with subsidies

Fig. 1 Correlation of indicators of sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises with factors affecting it in agriculture, %. Source Calculated and built by the authors

Changes in the Agricultural Dynamics of tractor Dynamics of Machinery Market agricultural machinery sales for agricultural grain market Volume works and forestry harvesters sales

Fig. 2 Correlation of indicators of sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises with influencing factors in agricultural machinery, %. Source Calculated and built by the authors

but reduce its profitability and share in GDP. It is noteworthy that exports negatively affect all indicators of the sustainability of agricultural enterprises. Figure 2 shows that imports of agricultural machinery contribute to the growth of sales, but it also contributes to the deterioration of other indicators. The export of agricultural machinery negatively affects all indicators of sustainability, while the renewal of machinery is carring with it a positive effect.

Features of Sustainable Development of Agro-Industrial …

113

4 Conclusion Therefore, the following features of the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises in the context of sanctions were identified. First, the reorientation to the domestic market, as well as the transition of Russian agricultural export enterprises to alternative goods (export facilities) and other foreign trade partners. Second, active and highly efficient import substitution, which ensures the accelerated development of domestic entrepreneurship and its formation as a vector of growth of the Russian economy. Third, the deterioration in the financial performance of Russian agro-industrial enterprises during the period of economic sanctions, indicating a violation of their stability, but subsequently replaced by stabilization (restoration of stability). Fourth, the accelerated modernization of agro-industrial enterprises and the establishment of their subsidiary dependence. Fifth, the increased complexity of managing the sustainable development of agro-industrial enterprises. The deterministic features of Russian experience indicate that international trade and economic sanctions initially cause a moderate crisis of agro-industrial enterprises, but subsequently contribute to their sustainable development of domestic entrepreneurship both on the basis of the domestic market and on the basis of exports in new directions. The scale of benefits depends on the flexibility and adaptability of the enterprise.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Ali Kamil M, Ragulina Y, Bratarchuk T (2019) Features of cooperation of the Russian federation and African countries in the agro-industrial complex. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science, p 012093 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Belova IN, Yakimovich EA (2019a) Digital technology in the fishing sector: international and Russian experience. In: 1st international scientific conference on modern management trends and the digital economy—from regional development to global economic growth (MTDE). Proceedings of the 1st international scientific conference modern management trends and the digital economy: from regional development to global economic growth (MTDE 2019). Yekaterinburg, Russia. AEBMR-advances in economics business and management research, vol 81, pp 277–280 Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Degtereva EA, Zobov AM, Starostin VS (2019b) Activity of Russian companies of the agri-food sector in regional industrial value-added chains. Adv Syst Sci Appl 19(1):31–43

114

P. D. Kamilova et al.

Deloitte (2020) Overview of the agricultural market—2019. https://www2.deloitte.com/ru/ ru/pages/consumer-business/articles/snapshot-of-the-russian-agroindustry.html (data accessed: 06.05.2020) Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of Elinor Ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Issues 4(3):269–278 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 44, pp 135–148 Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The platform of information and economic security of the Russian industrial enterprises. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):123–129 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J 15(2):589–597 National Research University “Higher School of Economics,” Development Center (2020) Rinok selskokhozyastvennikh mashin—2019 [Agricultural Machinery Market - 2019.] https://dcenter. hse.ru/data/2019/12/23/1525051005/Pynok%20celckoxozctvennyx%20maxin-2019. pdf (data accessed: 06.05.2020) Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Issues 7(4):781–791. https://www.researchg ate.net/publication/326001978_Sustainable_developmet_processes_Service_sector_in_post-ind ustrial_economy Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pozdnyakova UA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018a) Industriya 4.0 kak otrasl promishlennosti: ponyatie, suchnost, osobennosti. [Industry 4.0 as a branch of industry: concept, essence, features.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/588-industriya-4-0-kak-otr asl-promyshlennosti-ponyatie-sushchnost-i-osobennosti (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Sorokina NA (2018b) Kozepziya ekonomiki znaniy: fundamentalnie pologeniya i perspektivi realizazii v sovreennoi Rossii [The concept of the knowledge

Features of Sustainable Development of Agro-Industrial …

115

economy: fundamental positions and prospects for implementation in modern Russia.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/589-kontseptsiya-ekonomiki-znanij-fundamentalnye-polozheniya-i-per spektivy-realizatsii-v-sovremennoj-rossii (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Yatsechko SS (2018c) Predposilki formirovaniya i razvitiya industrii 4.0 v usloviyakh ekonomiki znaniy [Prerequisites for formation and development of industry 4.0 in conditions of knowledge economy.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/590-predposylki-formir ovaniya-i-razvitiya-industrii-4-0-v-usloviyakh-ekonomiki-znanij (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Ragulina Y, Bratarchuk T (2019) Conceptual problems of contemporary additional education in the agro-industrial complex: employers’ personnel strategies. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science, p 012102 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 313–339 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented Sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Modernization as a Condition for Sustainable Economic Development Lira K. Gurieva , Uliana S. Borisova , and Kometa T. Paytaeva

Abstract Purpose: The authors objective is to identify the applied features of modernization as conditions for sustainable economic development in developed and developing countries and to determine the Paretooptimality for each of these categories of countries. Design/methodology/approach: The top 8 developed and top 8 developing countries that demonstrated the highest level of digitalization in the IMD digital competitiveness rating for 2019 were selected as the objects for this research. The methodology of this research is based on the method of regression and scenario analysis, as well as the optimization method. Findings: It was revealed that in developed countries it is possible to simultaneously comply with all criteria for the sustainability of the economy, but this requires a slowdown in the pace of modernization, that is, moderate digitalization. This puts the interests of sustainable development in sharp contradiction to the interests of economic growth and global competitiveness, impeding the practical implementation of the identified Pareto-optimal. In developing countries, it is impossible to simultaneously meet all the criteria for economic sustainability—the identified Paretooptimality leads to a decrease in the average value of sustainability indicators, eliminating the need for optimization. At the same time, the general logic implies a more active modernization, that is, accelerated digitalization of the economy in developing countries. Originality/value: It has been proved that modernization, currently carried out on the basis of digitalization, is a condition for the sustainable development of the economy. However, at the same time, all criteria for sustainable development are L. K. Gurieva (B) North Ossetian State University Named After K.L. Khetagurova and Financial University Under the Government of the Russian Federation (Vladikavkaz Branch), Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] U. S. Borisova North-Eastern Federal University (NEFU), Yakutsk, Russia e-mail: [email protected] K. T. Paytaeva Institute of Economics and Finance, Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_12

117

118

L. K. Gurieva et al.

difficult to meet in modernization. The results offer an opportunity for more accurate modelling and planning of public economic policies, taking into account the specificities of developed and developing countries, and also prove the variability of economic modernization for its sustainable development. Keywords Modernization · Digitalization · Industry 4.0 · Sustainable development · Economy · Developed countries · Developing countries · Paretooptimality JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction The traditional narrow-minded view of sustainable economic development as a complete absence of change and the preservation of traditions causes a negative interpretation of innovation, since they lead to changes and disequilibrium. The progressive comprehensive idea of the sustainable development of the economy, justified in Chaps. 1 and 2 of this book, clarifies the impact of innovations and suggests, on the contrary, their positive interpretation. Modernization, in a modern context identified with digitalization, contributes to meeting all four identified criteria for sustainable development. The equilibrium of the economy is maintained due to the expansion of opportunities for solving socially significant problems and protecting the environment based on advanced technologies. In the context of modernization, economic growth can become more socially oriented and green, thereby bridging the gap between the social, economic and environmental fields of the economy. The stability of the economy, interpreted as equitable economic growth, is ensured in the conditions of modernization by increasing the global competitiveness of the economic system and maintaining its position in world markets. In the context of accelerated scientific and technological progress, abandonment of modernization threatens the stability of the economy more than its implementation. The balance of the economy in terms of social justice is ensured through modernization through increased access to high technology, goods and services. The opposition of people and machines in industry 4.0 contributes to social unity, erasing differences in society and overcoming any imbalances—financial, gender, cultural, etc. Finally, the flexibility and adaptability of the economy obviously implies the introduction of innovation and harmonizes with the idea of modernization. Nevertheless, despite the fundamental integrity, the practical implementation of the concept of modernization for sustainable development may lead to contradiction of the identified criteria for the sustainability of economic systems. We also hypothesize that the impact of modernization on sustainable development in developed and developing countries varies significantly and needs fundamentally different management approaches. The purpose of this chapter is to identify the application

Modernization as a Condition for Sustainable Economic Development

119

of modernization as a condition for sustainable economic development in developed and developing countries and to determine the Pareto-optimal for each of these categories of countries.

2 Materials and Method The essence and specifics of modernization in modern business conditions, consisting in the spread of digital technologies and the transition to the 4.0 industry, are reflected in Popkova (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2020), Popkova et al. (2019), Popkova and Gulzat (2020a, b), Popkova et al. (2018), Popkova and Parakhina (2019), Popkova and Zmiyak (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2019), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019a, b), Sergi (2019), Sergi et al. (2019a, b), Shulus et al. (2020). Traditional idea of modernization as antagonism of sustainable development of economy and also its scientific criticism and arguments in favor of modernization for the benefit of sustainable development can be found in Andronova et al. (2019), Haabazoka (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018a, b, c), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). The literature review has identified the problem as high, but also reflects the gap in its study, which is the primacy of theoretical scientific research with a lack of empirical research, which impedes the development of a scientific basis for practical public administration of modernization for sustainable development. Developed and developing countries are not scientifically differentiated from modernization as conditions for sustainable economic development, which also requires further research. Top 8 developed and top 8 developing countries have been selected as facilities for this study. demonstrating the highest level of digitalization in the IMD digital competitiveness rating for 2019. current at the end of 2019-the first half of 2020. The index of digital competitiveness is an indicator of modernization, as an indicator of economic equilibrium—the index of sustainable development, as an indicator of economic stability—the rate of economic growth, as an indicator of economic balance—GDP per capita, as an indicator of the flexibility and adaptability of the economy—the quality of life index. The statistical basis of the study is shown in Table 1. The methodology of this research is based on the scenario analysis method and the optimization method. Based on the data from Table 1, paired linear regression models of the form y = a * x + b are constructed and correlation coefficients are calculated. All calculations are made separately in the category of developed countries and in the category of developing countries. Based on the obtained models, the target values of the dependencies of the variable (x) are determined, which are necessary to reach the values of each of the independent variables (y) separately in four scenarios. As a result, the arithmetic mean of the independent variable (x) is calculated, and the values that in this case will take dependent variables are determined—this is how the

120

L. K. Gurieva et al.

Table 1 Statistics on digital modernization and sustainable development in developed and developing countries in 2020 Category

Developed countries

Country (place in IMD ranking from 63)

Digital Rate of GDP per Quality competitiveness economic capita, US$ of life index, Points growth, % index, 1–100 points 1–200

Sustainable development index, points 1–100

x

y1

y2

y3

y4

United States (1)

100.000

2.121

64,212.535

176.77

74.5

Singapore (2)

99.373

2.553

53,557.605

146.09

69.6

Sweden (3)

96.070

2.181

53,337.608

180.52

85.0

Denmark (4)

95.225

1.801

55,547.883

196.47

85.2

Switzerland 94.648 (5)

1.600

79,855.924

196.08

78.8

Netherlands 94.261 (6)

1.732

47,012.124

186.41

80.4

Finland (7)

93.732

1.511

45,013.048

195.06

82.8

Norway (8)

93.671

2.098

76,527.780

179.78

80.7

Developing China (22) countries Malaysia (26)

84.292

6.000

9,850.988

99.87

73.2

82.390

4.900

11,264.255

120.39

69.6

Qatar (31)

75.897

2.311

73,950.054

164.29

66.3

Russia (38)

70.406

1.500

11,558.835

104.05

70.9

Saudi Arabia (39)

69.036

1.991

22,650.657

151.75

64.8

Thailand (40)

68.434

3.239

7,024.749

104.54

73.0

Chile (42)

66.724

2.700

14,595.095

123.80

75.6

India (44)

64.952

7.791

2,173.500

115.41

61.1

Source Compiled by the authors based on the materials of the Institute of Scientific Communications (2020)

optimal scenario (Pareto-optimal) is compiled, which allows you to simultaneously meet all the criteria for the sustainable development of the economy.

Modernization as a Condition for Sustainable Economic Development

121

3 Results Based on the results of the regression analysis of data from Table 1, the following results of the dependence of indicators of sustainable development on the digitalization indicator, that is, modernization, were obtained (Table 2). According to Table 2, the correlation of indicators of sustainable development with the indicator of digitalization (modernization) in developed countries is on average: (51.32 + 0.25 + 50.23 + 563.94)/4 = 38.94. In developing countries, it is much lower and amounts to (3.25 + 3.11 + 0.58 + 6.06)/4 = 3.26. Consequently, in developed countries, the 38.94% sustainability of the economy is due to modernization, and in developing countries only 3.26%. As part of the scenario analysis, the following four scenarios are modeled for the period up to 2022: – Scenario 1, where the rate of economic growth (y1) increases by 3 times compared to 2020; – Scenario 2, in which GDP per capita (y2) increases 1.1 times (that is, by 10%) compared to 2020; – Scenario 3, in which the quality of life index (y3) increases by 1.1 times (that is, by 10%) compared to 2020; – Scenario 4, where the sustainable development index (y4) rises 1.25 times (that is, 25%) compared to 2020. The results of the scenario analysis obtained from Table 2 are shown in Tables 3 and 4. As shown in Table 3, the Pareto optimality modernization for sustainable economic development in developed countries is established when the digital competitiveness index (x) is reduced by 0.12% compared to 2020 and amounts to 95.87 points. In this case, the economic growth rate (y1) decreases by 0.54% to 1.95%, GDP per capita (y2) increases by 0.05% to $5,9383.06, the quality of life index (y3) increases by 0.315 to 182.15 points and the sustainable development index Table 2 Results of regression analysis of the dependence of indicators of sustainable development on the indicator of digitalization (modernization) Category

Indicator

Developed countries

Variable a

0.1006

Variable b Correlation, % Developing countries

y1

y2

y3

y4

−260.84

−4.7228

−1.5759

−7.6934

84,391

634.93

230.72

51.32

0.25

50.23

53.94

555.3

−0.2439

0.1656

−21.274

140.76

57.265

3.11

0.58

6.06

Variable a

0.0575

Variable b

−0.3821

Correlation, % Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

3.28

122

L. K. Gurieva et al.

Table 3 Scenario analysis of modernization for sustainable economic development in developed countries Variable

Scenario 1

Scenario 2 –

Scenario 3

y1

5.85

y2

–

y3

–

–

200.36

y4

–

–

–

x

134.63

65,321.4

73.11

Scenario 4

Best case scenario

Parameters 2020

Parameters, % −0.54241

–

–

1.94

1.95

–

–

59,415.57

59,383.06

0.05474

–

92.02

182.72

182.15

0.31535

99.53

79.83

79.63

0.25441

83.25

95.75

95.87

−0.12517

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

Table 4 Scenario analysis of modernization for sustainable economic development in developing countries Variable Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Best case scenario y1

11.41

– 21,046.9

–

–

y2

–

–

–

y3

–

–

135.31

–

y4

–

–

–

x

205.08

76.21

22.35

3.80

2020

Gain, % 3.80 −0.048

19,135.18 19,133.52 0.0087 123.01

123.01 −0.0009

86.64

69.32

69.31 0.00463

177.39

120.26

72.77 65.2652

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

(y4) increases by 0.25% to 79.63 points. The aggregate increase in indicators of sustainable development is: −0.54 + 0.05 + 0.31 + 0.25 = 0.08%. As shown in Table 4, the Pareto optimality modernization for sustainable economic development in developing countries is established when the digital competitiveness index (x) increases by 65.26% compared to 2020 and amounts to 72.77 points. In this case, the economic growth rate (y1) decreases by 0.05% to 3.80%, GDP per capita (y2) increases by 0.009% to $19,133.52, the quality of life index (y3) decreases by 0.0009 to 123.01 points and the sustainable development index (y4) increases by 0.005% to 69.31 points. The total increase in indicators of sustainable development is: −0.05 + 0.009–0.0009 + 0.005 = −0.04%.

4 Conclusion Therefore, as a result of the research, it was proved that the modernization currently carried out on the basis of digitalization is a condition for the sustainable development of the economy. However, the simultaneous implementation of all criteria for sustainable development in modernization is difficult, making it possible either to achieve sustainable development in targeted (or targeted) directions, making a choice

Modernization as a Condition for Sustainable Economic Development

123

between equilibrium, stability, balance, flexibility and innovation, while achieving outstanding results, or to strive simultaneously to meet all criteria for sustainable development, while obtaining limited results. In developed countries, all criteria for economic sustainability can be met simultaneously, but this requires a slowdown in the pace of modernization, that is, moderate digitalization. This puts the interests of sustainable development in sharp contradiction to the interests of economic growth and global competitiveness, impeding the practical implementation of the identified Paretooptimality. In developing countries, it is impossible to simultaneously meet all the criteria for economic sustainability—the Paretooptimality identified, instead of the necessary increase, leads to a decrease in the average value of sustainability indicators, eliminating the need for optimization. At the same time, the general logic implies a more active modernization, that is, accelerated digitalization of the economy in developing countries. The results offer an opportunity for more accurate modelling and planning of public economic policies, taking into account the specificities of developed and developing countries, and also prove the variability of economic modernization for its sustainable development.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Starostin VS, Degtereva (2019) Study of sector-specific innovation efforts: the case from Russian economy. Entrepreneurship Sustain Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship Sustain Center 7(1):540–552 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (ed) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham, Online ISBN 978-3-030-00102-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set (data accessed: 06.05.2020) Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The Platform of information and economic security of the Russian industrial enterprises. Indus Compet Digital Manag Integr 1(1):123–129

124

L. K. Gurieva et al.

Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Issues 7(4):781–791 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG (2019) Preconditions of formation and development of industry 4.0 in the conditions of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169(1):65–72 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020a) Technological revolution in the 21st century: digital society versus artificial intelligence. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 91, pp 339–345 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020b) Contradiction of the digital economy: public well-being versus cyber threats. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 87, pp 112–124 Popkova EG, Parakhina VN (2019) Managing the global financial system on the basis of artificial intelligence: possibilities and limitations. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 57, pp 939–946 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety versus rationality. Springer International Publishing Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human capital and AI in industry 4.0. Convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. J Intell Capital. (In press) Popkova EG, Zmiyak KV (2019) Priorities of training of digital personnel for industry 4.0: social competencies versus technical competencies. On the Horizon 27(3–4):138–144 Popkova EG, Morozova IA, Litvinova TN (2018) Transformational processes in the media system under industry conditions 4.0: future outlines and perspectives (reflections on the article by Alexander P. Sukhodolov, DSc. In Economics, Professor and Irina A. Kuznetsova, PhD in Engineering, Associate Professor “Designing the mass media as a homeostatic system by means of automation engineering: Basic concepts, structure, components”). Theor Pract Issues Journal 7(1):145–154 Popkova EG, Egorova EN, Popova E, Pozdnyakova UA (2019) The model of state management of economy on the basis of the internet of things. Stud Comput Intell 826:1137–1144 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018a) Industriya 4.0 kak otrasl promishlennosti: ponyatie, suschnost, osobennosti [Industry 4.0 as a branch of industry: concept, essence, features.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/588-industriya-4-0-kak-otr asl-promyshlennosti-ponyatie-sushchnost-i-osobennosti (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Sorokina NA (2018b) Konzepziya ekonomiki znanii: fundamentalnie pologeniya i perspektivi realizacii v sovremennoi Rossii [The concept of the knowledge economy: fundamental positions and prospects for implementation in modern Russia.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region. https://archilab.online/konferentsii2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/589-kontseptsiya-ekonomiki-znanij-fundamentalnye-polozheniya-i-per spektivy-realizatsii-v-sovremennoj-rossii (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Yatsechko SS (2018c) Predposilki formirovaniya i razvitiya industria 4.0 v usloviyakh ekonomiki znanii [Prerequisites for formation and development of industry 4.0 in conditions of knowledge economy.] In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM18. XXI AllRussian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region.” https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/590-predposylki-formir ovaniya-i-razvitiya-industrii-4-0-v-usloviyakh-ekonomiki-znanij (data accessed: 05.06.2020) Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174

Modernization as a Condition for Sustainable Economic Development

125

Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019a) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019b) Toppriority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Bogoviz AV, Litvinova TN (2019a) Understanding industry 4.0: AI, the internet of things, and the future of work. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Sozinova AA, Fetisova OV (2019b) Modeling Russian industrial, tech, and financial cooperation with the Asia-Pacific Region. In: Sergi BS (ed) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, pp 195–223 Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. In: Lecture notes in networks and systems, vol 92, pp 353–359 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented Sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Scientific and Methodological Support for Sustainable Economic Development

Methodology for Indicative Assessment of Sustainability of Economic Development Ramazan B. Shakhbanov , Natalya V. Sharapova , and Aza A. Bisultanova

Abstract Purpose The purpose of the work is to develop a methodology for indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development. Design/methodology/approach A scientific methodology for indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development has been developed from the point of view of a systematic (polycriterial, not limited to the goals of sustainable development) approach to its interpretation. The basis of which is the author’s algorithm for conducting the assessment. Findings The author’s methodology for indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development has the following advantages. First, the possibility of a quantitative–qualitative assessment: the methodology offers not only numerical evaluation results, but also recommendations for their qualitative (logical) interpretation. Second, flexibility, taking into account the specifics of developed and developing countries: for them, sustainability indicators are assigned different weights, and each economy can assign its own weights to indicators as necessary. Third, the high level of detail of the evaluation results: not only the overall result is available, but also the individual results for each indicator, which allows you to identify the degree of compliance of the economy with each of the sustainability criteria and conduct an expanded analysis of the causal relationships of sustainable development management. Fourth, universality: the methodology offers a common (basic) evaluation algorithm that can be adapted to each individual economy and each new time period (updated scales, weights). Originality/value As a result of the reality check of the author’s methodology of indicative assessment of the stability of the development of the economy on the example of Russia in 2020, it was revealed that it demonstrates insufficient stability and balance, but high balance, flexibility R. B. Shakhbanov (B) Dagestan State University, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] N. V. Sharapova Ural State University of Economics, Yekaterinburg, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A. A. Bisultanova Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_13

129

130

R. B. Shakhbanov et al.

and adaptability. The hierarchical synthesis of its stability was 2.8 points, which indicates unsustainable development, expressed need and significant prospects for its improvement. Keywords Methodology · Indicative assessment · Sustainability · Development · Economy · Developed countries · Developing countries · Modern Russia JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction The need to measure the sustainability of economic development is explained, firstly, by the need to determine the current level of sustainability for international comparisons. In the context of marked competition of countries not only as players in the markets of factors of production, goods and services, but also as territories for living and doing business, the popularity of international comparisons is very high. They streamline decision-making and redirect migration flows by sending signals to stakeholders in a timely manner. The presence of special metrics allows you to accelerate the positive result (for example, the influx of investment) of regulatory measures aimed at ensuring sustainability, thereby increasing their effectiveness. Second, the need under consideration relates to the need to identify the dynamics of change in sustainability. Business systems can monitor their progress and identify signs of declining sustainability to adjust public administration practices in a timely manner. In addition, the sustainability dimension can serve the interests of corporate and public monitoring of public administration. These reasons explain the relevance of the indicative assessment of the sustainability of the economy, but its implementation in practice is difficult. With the classic («narrow») approach to the interpretation of sustainability from the point of view of the implementation of global sustainable development goals, the problem of inadequacy arises. It is related to the fact that the sustainable development index calculated by the UN characterizes only one component of sustainability, namely, equilibrium, leaving out the remaining components—stability, balance, flexibility and adaptability of the economy, justified in chapters 1–2 of this book. An improved («broad») approach to the treatment of sustainability, covering all its components, in the way of measuring sustainability, is faced with the problem of data inconsistency, since statistical indicators characterizing different components of sustainability have different units of measurement. Thus, a new scientific (systemic) approach to the interpretation of stability requires the creation of special methodological support for its measurement. The purpose of this work is to develop a methodology for indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development.

Methodology for Indicative Assessment of Sustainability …

131

2 Materials and Method The methodological provisions of the classic approach to measuring the sustainability of the economy in accordance with its interpretation from the perspective of global sustainable development goals based on UN materials are set forth in such sources of research literature as Chalhoub (2018), Hayat et al. (2019), Moschen et al. (2019), Mwila and Turay (2018), Opoku (2019), Tripathi et al. (2020), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018a, b), Litvinova (2018). A systematic approach to the study of sustainable development from the perspective of different criteria beyond the achievement of global sustainable development goals and its selected methodological issues is disclosed in the publications of Andronova et al. (2019), Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka (2019), Inshakov et al. (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016), 2017) Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). In this work, the author’s scientific methodology for indicative assessment of the stability of the development of the economy from the point of view of a systemic (polycriterial, not limited to the goals of sustainable development) approach to its interpretation, based on the following algorithm (Fig. 1). As it can be seen from the Fig. 1—in the first stage, the indicators are universalized, meaning, they are converted to common units of measure by determining their control intervals (compiling scales) for assigning point values (from 1 to 5). Indicators are also weighted, that is, their values are distributed so that their sum is 1. The second

Phase 1: Universalization of indicators

• Bringing key figures to common units of measure by defining their control intervals (compiling scales) for assigning score values, weighting key figures

Stage 2: Ranking of indicators

• Assign signification to key figures to differentiate their significance

Stage 3: Hierarchical Synthesis

• Finding the product of signified values of indices and their significate coefficients

Fig. 1 Algorithm of application of author’s methodology of indicative assessment of stability of economy development from the points of view of system approach to its interpretation. Source developed and compiled by the authors

132

R. B. Shakhbanov et al.

stage is related to the ranking of indicators, that is, the assignment of weights to them (the sum of weights is always 1) to differentiate their significance. The third stage is hierarchical synthesis, that is, finding the product of weighted values of indicators and their weight coefficients. For qualitative interpretation of hierarchical synthesis (HS) results it is recommended to follow the following logic: • If HS is less than 3, then the economy is unstable; • If HS is in the range of 3 to 5, then the economy shows insufficient stability; • If HS is in the range of 5 (inclusive) to 7, then the economy demonstrates standard, average HStic stability; • If HS is in the range of 7 (inclusive) to 9, then the economy shows high stability. • If HS is more than 9, then the stability of the economy is greatest.

3 Results In accordance with the algorithm for applying the author’s methodology of indicative assessment of the stability of the development of the economy from the standpoint of a systemic approach to its interpretation (Fig. 1), at its first stage, based on statistics for 2020, reference intervals (scales) were determined for assigning score values to indicators that meet the criteria for the sustainability of the development of the economy, highlighted in chapters 1–2 of this book (Table 1). Scales are compiled taking into account the minimum and maximum values of each indicator achieved in 2020 (according to the results of 2019). At the second stage, taking into account the current (current in 220) priorities of developed and developing countries, indicators of sustainable development are arranged in this work and weights are assigned to them, the sum of which is 1. In the economic practice of each economic system, its own ranking can be carried out depending on the strategic priorities of the sustainable development of the economy. The results are shown in Table 2. At the third stage, for the practical purposes of the research, we will test the proposed author’s methodology for indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development on the example of Russia in 2020 (Table 3). Source: calculated and compiled by the authors based on the materials of the Institute of Scientific Communications (2020). Based on Table 3 data, we calculate the hierarchical synthesis: IS = 4 * 0.4 + 1 * 0.2 + 2 * 0.3 + 4 * 0.1 = 2.8. The obtained value of IP indicates that the Russian economy is unstable, and its development needs enhanced state regulation.

Sustainable Development Index

Rate of variation in economic growth over the past 5 years

Percentage of GDP deviation per capita from leader

Global Less than 40 points Competitiveness Index

Economic stability

Economic balance

Flexibility and adaptability of the economy

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

Less than 10,000 US dollars

More than 50%

Less than 40 points

41–55 points

10,001–30,000 US dollars

30–49%

41–55 points

low value, insufficient stability

low value, unsustainable development

Equilibrium of the economy

2 points

1 point

56–66 points

30,001–60,000 US dollars

10–29%

56–66 points

normal value, standard stability

3 points

67–77 points

60,001–89,999 US dollars

5–9%

67–77 points

above average, high stability

4 points

Scale for assigning point values to indicator and their qualitative interpretation

Evaluation indicator showing the degree of compliance with the criterion

Criterion for sustainable economic development

More than 78 points

More than 90,000 US dollars

Less than 4%

Over 78 points

very high value, highest stability

5 points

Table 1 Control intervals (scales) for assigning point values to indicators that meet the criteria for the sustainability of the economy in 2020 (stage 1)

Methodology for Indicative Assessment of Sustainability … 133

134

R. B. Shakhbanov et al.

Table 2 Ranking and signification of indicators of economic sustainability in developed and developing countries in 2020 (phase 2) Criterion for sustainable economic development

Evaluation indicator showing the degree of compliance with the criterion

Ranking and signification of indicators

Equilibrium of the economy

Sustainable development index

3

3/10 = 0.3

4

4/10 = 0.4

Economic stability

Rate of variation 4 in economic growth over the past 5 years

4/10 = 0.4

2

2/10 = 0.2

Economic balance

Percentage of GDP deviation per capita from leader

1

1/10 = 0.1

3

3/10 = 0.3

Flexibility and adaptability of the economy

Global 2 competitiveness index

2/10 = 0.2

1

1/10 = 0.1

In developed countries

In developing countries

Rank Weight Rank (1–4, rank sum (sum of (1–4, rank = 10) weights = 1) sum = 10)

Weight (sum of weights = 1)

Source: Developed and compiled by the authors

4 Conclusion In conclusion, we note that the developed author’s methodology for indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development has the following advantages: • possibility of quantitative and qualitative assessment: the methodology offers not only numerical evaluation results, but also recommendations for their qualitative (logical) interpretation; • flexibility, accounting of specifics developed and developing countries: for them different weight coefficients are appropriated to indicators of stability, and each economy can appropriate own weight coefficients to indicators as required; • high level of detail of the evaluation results: not only the overall outcome is available, but also the individual results for each indicator, which allows to identify the degree of compliance of the economy with each of the sustainability criteria and conduct an expanded analysis of the causal relationships of sustainable development management; • universality: the methodology offers a general (basic) algorithm for conducting an assessment that can be adapted to each individual economy and each new time period (updated scales, weights).

Methodology for Indicative Assessment of Sustainability …

135

Table 3 Validation of the author’s methodology for indicative assessment of the sustainability of economic development on the example of Russia in 2020 (stage 3) Criterion for sustainable economic development

Evaluation indicator showing the degree of compliance with the criterion

Indicator value in Russia in 2020

Scale interval in Value which the value assigned to falls indicator

Significance indicator coefficient

Equilibrium of the economy

Sustainable development index

70.9 points

67–77 points

4 points

0.4

Economic stability

Rate of variation in economic growth over the past 5 years

68.39a

over 50%

1 point

0.2

Economic balance

Percentage of GDP deviation per capita from leader

11,558.835 US dollars

10,001–30,000 US dollars

2 points

0.3

Flexibility and adaptability of the economy

Global Competitiveness Index

66.7 points

67–77 points

4 points

0.1

2016: −0.248%, in 2017: 1.400%, in 2018: 1.444%, in 2019: 1.500%, in 2020: 1.500%. Arithmetic mean for 5 years: 1.12%, standard (standard deviation): 0.77 points, variation: 0.77 * 100/1.12 = 68.39%

a In

As a result of the reality testing of the author’s methodology of indicative assessment of the stability of the development of the economy on the example of Russia in 2020, it was revealed that it demonstrates insufficient stability and balance, but high balance, flexibility and adaptability. The hierarchical synthesis of its stability was 2.8 points, which indicates unsustainable development with an expressed need and significant prospects for its improvement.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA, Information Age Publishing

136

R. B. Shakhbanov et al.

Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Starostin VS (2019) Study of sector-specific innovation efforts: the case from Russian economy. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VSI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center 7(1):540–552 Chalhoub M (2018) Cultural heritage in sustainable development: stone houses as environmental assets in the East Mediterranean. J Cult Heritage Manage Sustain Dev 8(1):30–46. https://doi. org/10.1108/JCHMSD-06-2017-0040 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Iss 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (eds) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 57. Springer, Cham, Online ISBN 978-3-030-00102-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Hayat F, Khan A, Ashraf M (2019) Energy planning and sustainable development of Pakistan. Int J Energy Sect Manage 13(1):24–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJESM-04-2018-0006 Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. Lect Notes Netw Syst 44:135– 148 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA, Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020”. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set. Data accessed: 07 May 2020 Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The platform of information and economic security of the Russian Industrial Enterprises. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):123–129 Litvinova AI (2018) Upravlenie razvitiem infrastrukturnovo obespecheniya predprinimatelksoi deytelnosti na rossiskom rinke selskohoztekhniki na baze cifrovoi modernizacii [Managing the development of infrastructure support for entrepreneurial activity in the Russian agricultural machinery market based on digital modernization]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference—study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/593-upravlenie-razvit iem-infrastrukturnogo-obespecheniya-predprinimatelskoj-deyatelnosti-na-rossijskom-rynke-sel khoztekhniki-na-baze-tsifrovoj-modernizatsii. Data accessed: 05 June 2020 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrepreneurship Manage J 15(2):589–597 Moschen S, Macke J, Bebber S, Correa B, da Silva M (2019) Sustainable development of communities: ISO 37120 and UN goals. Int J Sustain High Educ 20(5):887–900. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJSHE-01-2019-0020 Mwila N, Turay M (2018) Augmenting talent management for sustainable development in Africa. World J Entrepreneurship Manage Sustain Dev 14(1):41–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJEMSD03-2017-0012 Opoku A (2019) Sustainable development, adaptation and maintenance of infrastructure. Int J Build Pathol Adapt 37(1):2–5. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-02-2019-074 Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Iss 7(4):781–791. https://jssidoi.org/jssi/pap ers/papers/view/309 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian Society. A volume in the series. In: Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing

Methodology for Indicative Assessment of Sustainability …

137

Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017a) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017b) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pozdnyakova UA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018a) Principialnie otlichiya perehoda k industrii 4.0 ot prediduschikh promishlennikh revolucii [Fundamental differences between the transition to industry 4.0 and previous industrial revolutions]. In Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI AllRussian electronic seminar-conference—Study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/591-printsipialnye-otlich iya-perekhoda-k-industrii-4-0-ot-predydushchikh-promyshlennykh-revolyutsij. Data accessed 05 June 2020 Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Yatsechko SS (2018b) Rol znacheniya ekonomiki znanii v kachestve platformi dlya stanovleniya industrii 4.0 [The role and importance of the knowledge economy as a platform for the formation of Industry 4.0.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference—study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region. https://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/592-rol-i-znache nie-ekonomiki-znanij-v-kachestve-platformy-dlya-stanovleniya-industrii-4-0. Data accessed: 05 June 2020 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects (pp 313–339). Palgrave Macmillan, London Tripathi D, Priyadarshi P, Kumar P, Kumar S (2020) Micro-foundations for sustainable development: leadership and employee performance. Int J Organ Anal 28(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJOA-01-2019-1622 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia and the Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Methodological Approach to Assessing the Effectiveness of Management of Sustainable Economic Development Zharyat B. Rabadanova, Tatiana P. Satsuk , and Zalina R. Israilova

Abstract Purpose The chapter’s purpose is to develop a methodological approach that provides a two-way review of the effectiveness of management of sustainable economic development and, therefore, allows both the results achieved and the costs incurred to be taken into account simultaneously (systemically). Design/Methodology/Approach The authors have developed a new methodological approach that allows a systematic assessment of the management of sustainable economic development from the point of view of efficiency as a ratio of results and costs. A set of indicators for assessing results and costs is proposed, their designations are introduced and evaluation formulas are proposed. Recommendations were made to bring the indicators to common units. A formula for calculating an integral indicator of the effectiveness of managing sustainable economic development has been developed. The matrix is proposed for qualitative interpretation of quantitative results of assessment of efficiency of management of sustainable development of economy in accordance with author’s methodical approach. Findings The developed methodological approach to assessing (monitoring) the management of sustainable economic development has the following advantages: completeness (simultaneous accounting of both results and costs), quantitative and qualitative assessment, logical structuring (both final and intermediate results are available for extended analysis), accuracy (taking into account not only efficiency, but also the feasibility of sustainable development from the standpoint of efficiency and lack of deficit of the state budget). Originality/value The results of the testing of the methodological approach developed on the example of developed and developing countries with the most developed institutions of public administration of the economy have demonstrated the great Z. B. Rabadanova (B) Dagestan State University, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] T. P. Satsuk Emperor Alexander I St. Petersburg State Transport University, St. Petersburg, Russia e-mail: [email protected] Z. R. Israilova Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_14

139

140

Z. B. Rabadanova et al.

potential for practical application of the approach. In Russia, moderate efficiency of government management of sustainable economic development was revealed due to low performance (0.89) and budget deficit (0.008), despite the predominance of results over costs (5.84). The highest ratio of results and costs was achieved in the field of economic equilibrium (15.56), a moderate ratio in the field of flexibility and adaptability of the economy (1.27) and a low value in the field of economic stability (0.70). Keywords Methodological approach · Systematics · Evaluation · Efficiency · Public administration · Sustainable development · Economics JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Sustainable development is a special feature of the economy, which provides advantages for all business entities operating in it, but provides them with limited opportunities to derive private benefits from it, and also involves the mass coverage of business entities with advantages (their non-selectivity). This makes sustainable development a public good, the different perceived value of which by business entities, the long-term payback or even loss-making of investments in which (targeting future generations), combined with high resource intensity, makes it a “market failure”. Lack of market incentives requires direct and active government regulation of sustainable economic development, which, like any direction of management, needs critical assessment (monitoring). In modern world economic practice, two alternative methodological approaches to monitoring the management of sustainable economic development are common. The first approach focuses on sustainable development results. The fundamental foundations of this approach are laid down by the global sustainable development goals formulated by the UN and reflecting only the very priorities of human development for the next 15 years (until 2030), regardless of how and with what costs they will be achieved. The second approach focuses on the costs of sustainable development. This approach was formed under pressure from public control over public administration, directing it to spend the state budget in accordance with the interests of society and business. The cyclical nature of the world economic system, which has intensified in recent years, has also played an important role in shaping and consolidating this approach. The problem of fiscal deficits, characteristic of both developing and developed countries, is becoming increasingly acute under the influence of increasing economic crises. Creditors, including international organizations, place high demands on recipient countries, in particular by forcing them to reduce the cost of financing sustainable development.

Methodological Approach to Assessing the Effectiveness …

141

Existing methodological approaches to monitoring the regulation of sustainable development provide a one-sided view of it, identifying it as successful either when achieving targeted results, despite costs, or while minimizing costs, regardless of results. In this book, our purpose is to present a systematic view of the sustainability of economic systems. This involves two-way consideration of the effectiveness of the management of sustainable economic development, allowing both the results achieved and the costs incurred to be taken into account simultaneously (systemically). This chapter’s purpose is to develop this particular approach.

2 Materials and Method The theory and practice of government regulation of the economy on the principles of sustainability is disclosed in the works of scientists such as Chalhoub (2018), Hayat et al. (2019), Moschen et al. (2019), Mwila and Turay (2018), Opoku (2019), Tripathi et al. (2020), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018a), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018b), Litvinova (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017) and Popkova et al. (2020). Existing methodological approaches to monitoring the regulation of economic resilience in terms of costs or results (individually) are described in research papers by authors such as Andronova et al. (2019), Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka (2019), Inshakov et al. (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi et al. (2019), Sergi (2018) and Zavyalova et al. (2018). In this chapter, a new methodological approach has been developed that allows a systematic assessment of the management of sustainable economic development from the point of view of efficiency as a ratio of results and costs. As results, it is proposed to use indicators that meet the criteria for the sustainable development of the economy identified in Chaps. 1 and 2 of this book, and as costs—the costs borne by the State to achieve them. To ensure comparability of indicators, they are translated into fractions from 1-1 (one) is the arithmetic average of the indicator around the world. Indicators and their designation system, as well as evaluation formulas for intermediate indicators in accordance with the author’s methodological approach are given in Table 1. In accordance with the notations introduced in Table 1, the author’s methodological approach involves the use of the following formula for calculating the integral indicator of the effectiveness of managing sustainable economic development (Iesdg): Iesdg = (EQ + ST + BL + FA)/4

(1)

142

Z. B. Rabadanova et al.

Table 1 Indicators, their designation system and evaluation formulas for intermediate indicators according to the author’s methodological approach Criterion for sustainable economic development

Indicator of results

Name

Name

Designation Formula

Cost measure

Designation Name

Designation

Equilibrium EQ of the economy

EQr//EQe Sustainable development index

EQr

Share of EQe renewable energy consumption

Economic stability

ST

STr//STe

STr

Total investment in the economy

Economic balance

BL

BLr//BLe GDP per capita BLr

Social BLe expenditures of the state budget

FAr//FAe

R&D expenditure (share of GDP)

Flexibility FA and adaptability of the economy

Economic growth rate

Global FAr competitiveness index

STe

FAe

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

The special matrix considering not only value of an indicator of efficiency (Iesdg), but also the expediency of sustainable development of economy defined from positions of success of this management—effectiveness as an arithmetic average of the achieved results (SCS = EQr + STr + BLr + FAr)/4)—and also from positions of existence of a basic opportunity and usefulness of conditions for sustainable development of economy (lack of state budget deficit) is developed for qualitative interpretation of results of assessment. The matrix is shown in Table 2. As can be seen from Table 1, in order to recognize the management of sustainable economic development as highly effective in accordance with the author’s methodological approach, this management must meet three criteria: • to ensure high efficiency: results should not be less than 50% higher than costs (Iesdg ≥ 1.5); • to be highly productive, i.e. not lower than the global average (SCS ≥ 1); • to be carried out against the backdrop of the deficient state budget, that is, its non-zero balance (SBB ≥ 0). The greater the importance of each of the listed indicators, the higher the efficiency, and if the specified criteria are not met, the effectiveness is recognized as insufficient and needs to be improved by adjusting public administration for sustainable economic development. For clarity, Table 2 makes color highlights: the darker the cell, the more efficient the management of sustainable development.

Methodological Approach to Assessing the Effectiveness …

143

Table 2 Matrix for qualitative interpretation of quantitative results of assessment of efficiency of management of sustainable development of economy in accordance with author’s methodical approach Feasibility of sustainable economic development Management efficiency

SCS ≥ 1

SCS < 1

SCS < 1

and

or

and

SGB ≥ 0

SGB < 0

SGB < 0

Iesdg ≥ 1,5

Very high management efficiency

High management efficiency

Moderate management efficiency

1,5 < Iesdg < 1,0

Very high management efficiency

High management efficiency

Moderate management efficiency

Very high management efficiency

High management efficiency

Moderate management efficiency

Iesdg ≤ 1,0

The following symbols are used in the table Iesdg—an indicator of the effectiveness of management of sustainable economic development SCS—success (effectiveness) of sustainable economic development management SGB is the balance of the state budget Source developed and compiled by the authors

3 Results To test the developed methodology, the top 3 developed and top 3 developing economies were selected in the ranking of the World Economic Forum according to the value of the 1st dollar: Institutions sub-index in the framework of the global competitiveness index for 2020. Calculation of intermediate indicators (quantitative assessment) was made in Table 3. Source: compiled and calculated by the authors based on the materials of the Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), OECD (2020), World Bank (2020a, b), World Economic Forum (2020). Based on the data from Table 3, indices were calculated in accordance with the author’s procedure (Table 4).

4 Conclusion Therefore, the developed methodological approach to assessing (monitoring) the management of sustainable economic development has the following advantages: • completeness: system, simultaneous account and the results in the field of sustainable development achieved thanks to public administration and actually incurred

a Renewable

82.8 1.25 1511 0.60 45,013,045

EQr (/66.17)

Economic growth rate, %

STr (/2.5)

GDP per capita, US $

Far (/60.80)

0.94 28,707 1.48 2.76 2.15

Social expenditures of the state budget, % of GDP

BLe (/19.36)

R & D expenditure, % of GDP

FAe (/1.285)

23.424

Total investment in the economy, % of GDP

Ste (/24.83)

0.90

EQe (/47.91)

43.24

1.32

Global competitiveness index

Share of renewable energy consumption,

3.08 80.2

BLr (14637.15)

%a

81.2 (1)

Sustainable development index, scores 1–100

1.69

2.17

n.a

n.a

1.07

26.484

0.01

0.71

1.39

84.8

3.66

53,557,605

1.02

2553

1.05

69.6

80.4 (2)

0.96

1.23

0.98

18,930

1.00

24.795

0.64

30.79

1.26

76.7

3.00

43,939,310

1.03

2563

1.20

79.5

78.8 (3)

1.12

1.44

n.a

n.a

1.00

24.901

0.11

5.19

1.23

74.6

0.77

11,264,255

1.96

4900

1.05

69.6

68.6 (25)

Malaysia

1.67

2.15

n.a

n.a

1.69

41.957

0.26

12.41

1.22

73.9

0.67

9850,988

2.40

6000

1.11

73.2

56.8 (58)

China

Developing countries New Zealand

Finland

Singapore

Developed countries

Value of sub-index “institutes”, scores 1–100 (place)

energy consumption (% of total final energy consumption)

Ex[enditures

Results

Indicator

0.86

1.11

n.a

n.a

0.85

21.189

0.07

3.30

1.10

66.7

0.79

11,558,835

0.60

1500

1.07

70.9

52.6 (74)

Russia

Table 3 Preliminary quantitative assessment of the effectiveness of management of sustainable economic development in the selected countries in 2020 in accordance with the author’s methodological approach

144 Z. B. Rabadanova et al.

Methodological Approach to Assessing the Effectiveness …

145

Table 4 Quantification of the effectiveness of management of sustainable economic development in the sample countries in 2020 in accordance with the author’s methodological approach Indicators

Developed countries

Developing countries

Finland

Singapore

New Zealand

Malaysia

China

Russia

EQ, shares from 1

1.39

70.98

1.87

9.71

4.27

15.56

ST, shares from 1

0.64

0.96

1.03

1.95

1.42

0.70

BL, shares from 1

2.07

n/a

3.07

n/a

n/a

n/a

FA, shares from 1

0.61

0.83

1.32

1.09

0.73

1.27

Iesdg, shares from 1

1.18

24.25

1.82

4.25

2.14

5.84

SCS, shares from 1

1.56

1.78

1.62

1.25

1.35

0.89

SGB, % OF GDP

−0.534

1.459

2.562

−2.011

−3.374

0.008

Quality management interpretation

Moderate

Very high

Very high

High

High

Moderate

Source Calculated by the authors based on International Monetary Fund (2020)

costs of their achievement and also definition of their ratio from efficiency positions; • quantitative and qualitative assessment: the author’s technique allows not only to obtain quantitative results, but also offers logic for their qualitative interpretation; • logical structuring: not only the end result is available, but also intermediate results that identify the strengths and weaknesses of management and correct it in a timely manner; • accuracy: taking into account not only efficiency, but also the desirability of sustainable development in terms of efficiency and lack of deficit of the state budget. The results of the testing of the methodological approach that was developed on the example of developed and developing countries with the most developed institutions of public administration of the economy demonstrated the great potential for practical application of the approach. In Russia, moderate efficiency of government management of sustainable economic development was revealed due to low performance (0.89) and budget deficit (0.008), despite the predominance of results over costs (5.84). The highest ratio of results and costs was achieved in the field of economic equilibrium (15.56), a moderate ratio in the field of flexibility and adaptability of the economy (1.27) and a low value in the field of economic stability (0.70).

146

Z. B. Rabadanova et al.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Starostin VS, Degtereva (2019) Study of sector-specific innovation efforts: the case from Russian economy. Entrepreneurship and sustainability issues. VSI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center 7(1):540–552 Chalhoub M (2018) Cultural heritage in sustainable development: stone houses as environmental assets in the East Mediterranean. J Cult Herit Manage Sustain Dev 8(1):30–46. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/JCHMSD-06-2017-0040 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of elinor ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability —understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Iss 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (eds) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 57. Springer, Cham. Online ISBN 978–3-030-00102-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Hayat F, Khan A, Ashraf M (2019) Energy planning and sustainable development of Pakistan. Int J Energy Sector Manage 13(1):24–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJESM-04-2018-0006 Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. Lect Notes Netw Syst 44:135– 148 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020”. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set. Data accessed: 7 May 5 2020 International Monetary Fund (2020) World economic outlook database. https://www.imf.org/ext ernal/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/weoselgr.aspx. Data accessed: 7 May 2020 Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The platform of information and economic security of the Russian Industrial Enterprises. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):123–129 Litvinova AI (2018) Ypravlenie razvitiem infrastrukturnovo obespecheniya predprinimatelskoi deyatelnosti na rossiskom rinke selskohoztehniki na baze cifrovoi modernizacii [Managing the development of infrastructure support for entrepreneurial activity in the Russian agricultural machinery market based on digital modernization.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/593-upravlenie-razvit iem-infrastrukturnogo-obespecheniya-predprinimatelskoj-deyatelnosti-na-rossijskom-rynke-sel khoztekhniki-na-baze-tsifrovoj-modernizatsii. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrep Manage J 15(2):589–597

Methodological Approach to Assessing the Effectiveness …

147

Moschen S, Macke J, Bebber S, Benetti Correa da Silva M (2019) Sustainable development of communities: ISO 37120 and UN goals. Int J Sustain Higher Educ 20(5):887–900. https://doi. org/10.1108/IJSHE-01-2019-0020 Mwila N, Turay M (2018) Augmenting talent management for sustainable development in Africa. World J Entrep Manage Sustain Dev 14(1):41–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJEMSD-03-20170012 OECD (2020) Social spending. https://data.oecd.org/socialexp/social-spending.htm. Data accessed: 7 May 2020 Opoku A (2019) Sustainable development, adaptation and maintenance of infrastructure. Int J Build Pathol Adapt 37(1):2–5. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBPA-02-2019-074 Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Iss 7(4):781–791. https://jssidoi.org/jssi/pap ers/papers/view/309 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian Society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. A volume in the series Popkova EG (eds) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pozdnyakova UA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018a) Prinzipialnie otlichiya perehoda k industrii 4.0 ot prediduschikh promishlennikh revoluziy [Fundamental differences between the transition to industry 4.0 and previous industrial revolutions]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI AllRussian Electronic Seminar—conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/591-printsipialnye-otlich iya-perekhoda-k-industrii-4-0-ot-predydushchikh-promyshlennykh-revolyutsij. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Yatsechko SS (2018b) Rol i znachenie ekonomiki znaniy v kachestve platformi dlya stanovleniya industrii 4.0 [The role and importance of the knowledge economy as a platform for the formation of industry 4.0.] In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/592-rol-i-znache nie-ekonomiki-znanij-v-kachestve-platformy-dlya-stanovleniya-industrii-4-0. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing

148

Z. B. Rabadanova et al.

sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 313–339 Tripathi D, Priyadarshi P, Kumar P, Kumar S (2020) Micro-foundations for sustainable development: leadership and employee performance. Int J Organ Anal 28(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJOA-01-2019-1622 World Bank (2020a). Indicators. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator. Data accessed: 7 May 2020 World Bank (2020b) Perspektivy mirovoy ekonomiki. Medlennyy rost, politicheskie vyzovy [Perspectives of the global economy. Slow growth, political challenges]. https://www.vsemir nyjbank.org/ru/publication/global-economic-prospects. Data accessed: 7 May 2020 World Economic Forum (2020) The global competitiveness report 2019. https://www.weforum.org/ reports/how-to-end-a-decade-of-lost-productivity-growth. Data accessed: 7 May 2020 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented Sustainable Development Goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia and the Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Investment Attractiveness as an Indicator of the Sustainability of the Territory’s Development in the Conditions of Digitalization Uliana S. Borisova , Tatiana N. Shilova , and Razet S.-A. Makkaeva

Abstract Purpose The purpose of the research is defined as the justification of the new role of investment attractiveness as an indicator and source of sustainability of the development of the territory, arising in connection with the application of an expanded interpretation of sustainability and in connection with digitalization. Design/Methodology/Approach To identify the impact of investments on the stability of the economy, as well as its change under the influence of digitalization, this work uses the method of regression and comparative analysis. The authors are the regression dependence of indicators of economic sustainability in 2016 (before the start of full-scale digitalization) and in 2020 (under conditions of pronounced digitalization). Developed (OECD) and developing (BRICS) countries with the highest digital competitiveness according to the IMD (2020) rating were chosen as targets for the study, since the impact of digitalization is most clearly manifested in these countries. Findings It is justified that investment attractiveness in the conditions of digitalization becomes an indicator and a source of sustainability of the territory’s development. It was revealed that due to digitalization (in 2020), a close relationship was formed between the volume of investments in the economy and its level of global competitiveness (regression 52.07, correlation 20.49%), which was not before fullscale digitalization (in 2016). It has also been proven that digitalization transforms the impact of investment on compliance with all criteria for the sustainability of the economy. Originality/value It has been shown that before digitalization, even in a new (system) interpretation of sustainable development, the impact of investments on it U. S. Borisova (B) Institute of Finance and Economy, North-Eastern Federal University (NEFU), Yakutsk, Russia e-mail: [email protected] T. N. Shilova Russian State Agrarian University—Moscow State Agrarian University Named After K. A. Timiryazev, Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] R. S.-A. Makkaeva Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_15

149

150

U. S. Borisova et al.

was negative, neutral or moderately positive, and according to the results of digitalization, this influence became pronounced and positive. Therefore, a new—stimulating approach to investment management is needed for the sustainable development of the economy in the context of digitalization. Keywords Investment attractiveness · Investment · Indicator · Source · Sustainability · Development · Territory · Digitalization · Developed countries · Developing countries JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Investment plays an important role in the functioning and development of the economy and is positively interpreted from the perspective of the Theory of Economic Growth, which is especially evident in the scientific provisions of the Neo-Keynesian economic school. Investments accelerate economic growth by creating additional jobs and accelerating entrepreneurship. This determines the significance of investment attractiveness for the development of the economy, which is reflected in numerous global ratings. Since investment returns (percentages) can themselves be a source of economic growth, the effectiveness of capital management determines the development not only of the host country that receives investments but also of the host country that places them. Based on the provisions of the Theory of Economic Growth at the end of the 20th-beginning of the twenty-first century, the stock market was actively developed, accompanied by intensive innovations in investment. Nevertheless, despite the wide variety of investment management mechanisms and tools, it was they that caused the global financial and economic crisis, which, remarkably, had a particularly devastating effect on countries with the most investment attractiveness (on the United States and Western Europe). Under the influence of the crisis, the Theory of Economic Growth was replaced by the Theory of Sustainable Development, otherwise interpreting investment as sources of negative manifestations in the economy. In the classical interpretation of sustainability through the prism of defending the interests of society and protecting the environment, investment is considered in a negative way as a reason for deepening social and environmental problems, since commercial projects are most attractive, either that do not provide a solution to pressing problems of sustainable development, or that prevent their solution in the framework of other implemented measures. The new concept of sustainability of economic systems proposed in this book, which allows harmonizing the interests of economic growth and sustainable development (economic growth is defined as one of the criteria for sustainability), updates

Investment Attractiveness as an Indicator of the Sustainability …

151

the problem of developing a new concept of investment management for sustainable development. In addition, the new—digital—context changes the functioning and development of modern economic systems, which, in particular, can change the nature of the impact of investments on sustainability. The purpose of this study is defined as the rationale for the new role of investment attractiveness as an indicator and source of sustainability of the development of the territory, arising from the application of an expanded interpretation of sustainability and in connection with digitalization.

2 Materials and Method A classic view of investment as an obstacle to sustainable development is outlined in Abdelhalim and Eldin (2019), Andronova et al. (2019a, b), Franco and Tracey (2019), Haabazoka (2019), Hayat et al. (2019), Ivanov et al. (2019), Lawanda (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Petrenko and Stolyarov (2019), Sergi (2019), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018a), Pozdnyakova et al. (2018b), and Litvinova (2018). The current nature of the refraction of the impact of investments on stability through the prism of digitalization is discussed in Popkova (2019), Popkova et al. (2019), Popkova and Parakhina (2019), Popkova and Gulzat (2020a), Popkova and Gulzat (2020a, b), Popkova and Zmiyak (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2019, 2020), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019a, b), Sergi et al. (2019a, b), Sergi (2019), Shulus et al. (2020), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). Therefore, the theoretical basis of the problem posed is developed and quite strong, but the low knowledge of the connection between investment attractiveness and the sustainability of the development of the territory in the conditions of digitalization is its gap in need of filling. To identify the impact of investments on the stability of the economy, as well as its change under the influence of digitalization, this work uses the method of regression and comparative analysis. We find the regression dependence of indicators of economic sustainability that meet the criteria highlighted in Sect. 1.2 in Chap. 1 of this book, on the volume of investments in the economy (total investment, share of GDP) in 2016 (before the start of full-scale digitalization) and in 2020 (in conditions of pronounced digitalization). Developed (OECD) and developing (BRICS) countries with the highest digital competitiveness according to the IMD (2020) rating were chosen as targets for the study, since the impact of digitalization is most clearly manifested in these countries. The initial statistics are shown in Tables 1, and 2.

152

U. S. Borisova et al.

Table 1 Statistics of investment, sustainable development in developed and developing countries in 2016 (before full digitalization) Category

Country

Sustainable development index, points 1–100

Rate of GDP per economic capita, US growth, $ %

Developed countries

USA

72.7

−3.595

8,726.901 5.9

17.453

Singapore

74.6

6.700

8,113.257 5.7

44.085

Sweden

84.5

6.828

1,723.301 5.5

31.416

Denmark

83.9

−0.248

8,928.697 5.4

25.630

Switzerland 80.9

0.279

5,260.902 5.9

19.459

64.4

1.616

57,436.409 4.1

19.695

Developing Brazil countries China

Global competitiveness index, scores 1–100

Volume of investments in the economy, % of GDP

59.1

1.996

52,960.734 5.0

25.343

India

48.4

3.310

51,164.513 4.6

24.810

Russia

66.4

1.137

53,743.966 4.6

20.156

South Africa

53.8

−0.426

3,329.789 4.3

12.262

Source Compiled by authors based on materials Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), International Monetary Fund (2020), and World Economic Forum (2020) Table 2 Statistics of investment, sustainable development in developed and developing countries in 2020 (in conditions of pronounced digitalization) Category

Country

Sustainable Development Index, points 1–100

Rate of GDP per economic capita, US growth, $ %

Developed countries

USA

74.5

2.000

11,538.307 83.7

Singapore

69.6

5.900

10,643.692 84.8

41.957

Sweden

85.0

7.921

2,357.693 81.2

32.093

Denmark

85.2

1.500

11,980.732 81.2

21.189

Switzerland 78.8

2.201

5,925.135 82.3

19.589

1.825

66,194.406 60.9

21.002

Developing Brazil countries China India

70.6

Global Competitiveness Index, points 1–100

Volume of investments in the economy, % of GDP 19.554

76.2

2.552

54,735.908 73.9

26.484

61.1

1.697

55,035.852 61.4

26.321

Russia

70.9

1.873

57,306.962 66.7

20.962

South Africa

61.5

0.656

3,492.879 62.4

9.288

Source Compiled by authors based on materials Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), International Monetary Fund (2020), and World Economic Forum (2020)

Investment Attractiveness as an Indicator of the Sustainability …

153

3 Results

y = 0.5038x + 56.762 R² = 0.1239 0 20 40 60 Investment Volume in the Economy

80000 60000 40000

y = -399.49x + 34739 R² = 0.0201

20000 0 0 20 40 60 Investment Volume in the Economy

Economy Growth, %

100 80 60 40 20 0

10

y = 0.2945x - 5.3166 R² = 0.6534

5 0 0 -5

Competivness Index, баллы 1-100

GDP per cap. $ US dollars

Sustainable Economy Index, points 1-100

The results of the regression analysis from Table 1 are shown in Fig. 1 (2016) and from Table 2 in Fig. 2 (2020). As it can be seen from Fig. 2 in 2016, most of the sustainability criteria showed an almost constant relationship with investments during the time period under review. The largest change under the influence of digitalization is that with an increase in investment by 1% of GDP, the competitiveness index in 2016 increased by 0.03 points (correlation 16.72%), and in 2020 it increases by 52.07 points (correlation 20.49). Consequently, digitalization has established a closer link between investment and flexibility/adaptability, as evidenced by economic competitiveness. To clarify the identified causal relationships, we turn to the results of a comparative analysis of the impact of investments on the stability of the territory in the conditions of pre-digital society and in the conditions of digitalization (Table 3). As shown in Table 1, in a pre-digital society, investment contributes to accelerating economic growth, exacerbating environmental problems and increasing imbalances, and in a digitalization environment, investment enables the implementation of green digital projects to combat climate change. In a pre-digital society, there is a constant dependence on investment, increasing the cyclical nature of the economy, leading to its destabilization, and in a digitalization environment, even initial investments are enough for the subsequent stable growth of the digital economy. In a pre-digital society, investment flows are elitist and redirected to narrowminded projects that increase the imbalance of the economy, and digitalization allows public monitoring of investments for their equitable distribution. In a pre-digital society, investment is directed towards “catching up” innovations that improve the

20

40

60

Investment Volume in the Economy

8 6 4 2

y = 0.0311x + 4.3525 R² = 0.1672

0 0 20 40 60 Investment Volume in the Economy

Fig. 1 Regression curve of the dependence of indicators of sustainable development of the economy on the volume of investments in 2016. Source Calculated and built by the authors

U. S. Borisova et al.

100 80 60 40 20

y = 0.1955x + 68.679 R² = 0.0411

0

0 20 40 60 Investment Volume GDP per capital % 70000 60000 50000 y = -25.773x + 28536 40000 R² = 7E-05 30000 20000 10000 0 0 20 40 60 Investments in economy, % of GDP

Economy Growth, %

10

y = 0.2072x - 2.1271 R² = 0.6326

8 6 4 2 0 -2

0

100

Competitevness Index, points 1-100

GDP per cap US dollars

Sustainable Economy Index, points 1-100

154

20 40 60 Investment Volume GDP per capital %

80 60 y = 0.5207x + 61.435 R² = 0.2049

40 20 0 0

20 40 60 Investments in economy, % of GDP

Fig. 2 Regression curve of the dependence of indicators of sustainable development of the economy on the volume of investments in 2016. Source Calculated and built by the authors

quality of life, but slightly increase the competitiveness of the economy, and in a digitalization environment, investment allows for breakthrough development that increases competitiveness.

4 Conclusion Therefore, it is justified that investment attractiveness in the conditions of digitalization becomes an indicator and source of sustainability of the development of the territory. It was revealed that due to digitalization (in 2020), a close relationship was formed between the volume of investments in the economy and its level of global competitiveness (regression 52.07, correlation 20.49%), which was not before fullscale digitalization (in 2016). It has also been proven that digitalization transforms the impact of investment on compliance with all criteria for the sustainability of the economy.

Investment Attractiveness as an Indicator of the Sustainability …

155

Table 3 Comparative analysis of the impact of investments on the stability of the territory in the conditions of pre-digital society and in the conditions of digitalization Comparison criterion

In a pre-digital society

In conditions of digitalization

Impact of investment on economic equilibrium

Investments accelerate economic growth, exacerbate environmental problems and exacerbate imbalances

Investments enable green digital projects to combat climate change

Investment contribution to economic stability

There is a constant dependence on investment, increasing the cyclical nature of the economy, leading to its destabilization

Even initial investment is enough for the subsequent stable growth of the digital economy

Impact of investment on economic balance

Investment flows are elitist and redirected to narrowly directed projects that increase the imbalance of the economy

Digitalization enables public monitoring of investments for equitable distribution

The role of investment in collateral

Investments are directed towards “catch-up” innovations that improve the quality of life, but slightly increase the competitiveness of the economy

Investment in digitalization enables breakthrough development that increases competitiveness

Source Developed and compiled by the authors

If before digitalization, even in the new (system) interpretation of sustainable development, the impact on it of investments was negative, neutral or moderately positive, then according to the results of digitalization, this influence became pronounced and positive. Therefore, a new—stimulating approach to investment management is needed for the sustainable development of the economy in the context of digitalization. It is recommended to devote further research to its development.

References Abdelhalim K, Eldin A (2019) Can CSR help achieve sustainable development? Applying a new assessment model to CSR cases from Egypt. Int J Sociol Soc Policy 39(9/10):773–795. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-06-2019-0120 Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Belova IN, Yakimovich EA (2019a) Digital technology in the fishing sector: international and Russian experience. 1st international scientific conference on modern management trends and the digital economy—from regional development to global economic growth (MTDE).

156

U. S. Borisova et al.

In: Proceedings of the 1st international scientific conference modern management trends and the digital economy: from regional development to global economic growth (MTDE 2019). Yekaterinburg, Russia. AEBMR-Advances in Economics Business and Management Research, vol 81, pp 277–280 Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Degtereva EA, Zobov AM, Starostin VS (2019b) Activity of Russian companies of the agri-food sector in regional industrial value-added chains. Adv Syst Sci Appl 19(1):31–43 Franco I, Tracey J (2019) Community capacity-building for sustainable development: effectively striving towards achieving local community sustainability targets. Int J Sustain High Educ 20(4):691–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2019-0052 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (eds) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham. Online ISBN 978-3-030-001025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Hayat F, Khan A, Ashraf M (2019) Energy planning and sustainable development of Pakistan. Int J Energy Sect Manage 13(1):24–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJESM-04-2018-0006 IMD (2020) World digital competitiveness ranking 2019. https://www.imd.org/wcc/world-compet itiveness-center-rankings/world-digital-competitiveness-rankings-2019/. Data accessed 8 May 2020 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020”. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set. Data accessed: 8 May 2020 International Monetary Fund (2020) World economic outlook database. https://www.imf.org/ext ernal/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/weoselgr.aspx. Data accessed: 08 May 2020 Ivanov O, Zavyalova E, Ryazantsev S (2019) Public–private partnership in the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union. Central Asia and the Caucasus. English Edition, vol 2, no 2, pp 33–47 Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The platform of information and economic security of the Russian Industrial Enterprises. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):123–129 Lawanda I (2019) The importance of information access of cultural values to the principles of sustainable development in climate change. Glob Knowl Mem Commun 69(1/2):9–19. https:// doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-03-2019-0044 Litvinova AI (2018) Upravlenie razvitiem infrastrukturnovo obespecheniya predprinimatelskoi deyatelnosti na rossiskom rinke selkhoztehniki na baze cifrovoi modernizacii [Managing the development of infrastructure support for entrepreneurial activity in the Russian agricultural machinery market based on digital modernization]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/593-upravlenie-razvit iem-infrastrukturnogo-obespecheniya-predprinimatelskoj-deyatelnosti-na-rossijskom-rynke-sel khoztekhniki-na-baze-tsifrovoj-modernizatsii. Data accessed: 05 June 2020 Petrenko E, Stolyarov N (2019) Features of the management of international projects, taking into account intercultural differences of the partners. Entrep Sustain Iss 6(4):2037–2051. https://doi. org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(34) Petrenko E, Pizikov S, Mukaliev N, Mukazhan A (2018) Impact of production and transaction costs on companies’ performance according assessments of experts. Entrep Sustain Iss 6(1):398–410. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.1(24) Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing

Investment Attractiveness as an Indicator of the Sustainability …

157

Popkova EG (2019) Preconditions of formation and development of industry 4.0 in the conditions of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169(1):65–72 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020a) Technological revolution in the 21st century: digital society vs. artificial intelligence. Lect Notes Netw Syst 91:339–345 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020b) Contradiction of the digital economy: public well-being vs. cyber threats. Lect Notes Netw Syst 87:112–124 Popkova EG, Parakhina VN (2019) Managing the global financial system on the basis of artificial intelligence: possibilities and limitations. Lect Notes Netw Syst 57:939–946 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety vs. rationality. Springer International Publishing, Berlin Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human Capital and AI in Industry 4.0. Convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. J Intellect Cap (2020, In Press) Popkova EG, Zmiyak KV (2019) Priorities of training of digital personnel for industry 4.0: social competencies vs technical competencies. On the Horizon 27(3–4):138–144 Popkova EG, Egorova EN, Popova E, Pozdnyakova UA (2019) The model of state management of economy on the basis of the internet of things. Stud Comput Intel 826:1137–1144 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (eds) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV (2018a) Principialnie otlichiya perehoda k industrii 4.0 ot prediduschikh promishlennikh revoluzii [Fundamental differences between the transition to industry 4.0 and previous industrial revolutions]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI AllRussian electronic seminar—conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/591-printsipialnye-otlich iya-perekhoda-k-industrii-4-0-ot-predydushchikh-promyshlennykh-revolyutsij. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Pozdnyakova WA, Ragulina YV, Yatsechko SS (2018b) Rol i znachenie ekonomiki znanii v kachestve platformi dlya stanovleniya industrii 4.0 [The role and importance of the knowledge economy as a platform for the formation of industry 4.0]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXI All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “study of state support for investment attractiveness of the region”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/36-2018-xxi/592-rol-i-znache nie-ekonomiki-znanij-v-kachestve-platformy-dlya-stanovleniya-industrii-4-0. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019a) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019b) Toppriority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Sozinova AA, Fetisova OV (2019a) Modeling Russian industrial, tech, and financial cooperation with the Asia-Pacific Region. In: Sergi BS (ed) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK, pp 195–223 Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Vovchenko N, Ponomareva M (2019b) Central Asia and China: financial development through cooperation with Russia. In: Barnett WA, Bruno SS (eds) AsiaPacific contemporary finance and development (International symposia in economic theory and econometrics vol 26), pp 141–164. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK

158

U. S. Borisova et al.

Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. Lect Notes Netw Syst 92:353–359 World Economic Forum (2020) The global competitiveness report 2019. https://www.weforum.org/ reports/how-to-end-a-decade-of-lost-productivity-growth. Data accessed: 8 May 2020

System of Factors for Sustainable Economic Development: Globalization, Diversification, Security Maxim P. Pridachuk , Nadjivat M. Alieva , and Aza A. Bisultanova

Abstract Purpose The purpose of the chapter is to fill the identified gap by determining the impact of the system of key factors of the economy—globalization, diversification and security—on sustainable development, identifying the preferred directions for managing these factors and predicting their impact on the modern economy until 2030. Design/Methodology/Approach The research is based on the scripting method using the following algorithm. At the first stage, regression dependencies of manifestations of sustainable development on new factors of sustainable economic development are determined. At the second stage, automatic forecasts of changes in values of factor variables for the period until 2030 are made. At the third stage, scenarios of sustainable development of the economy are compiled depending on the influence of the selected factors on it, and the probability of their implementation is determined. Both developed countries (G7 example) and developing countries (BRICS example) have been selected as targets for the study to obtain a representative sample. Findings The research revealed that the systemic influence of the new—globalization, diversification and security—due to the challenges of our time, determines the negative realistic (most likely: 22.50%) scenario of sustainable development of the world economy for the period until 2030, which implies a decrease in the value of the global competitiveness index by 3.78%, economic growth rate—by 48.85%, GDP per capita—by 15.21% and the sustainable development index—by 0.04%. Originality/Value It is proved that an optimistic scenario of economic growth rate is quite likely (12.75%) providing an increase in the value of the global competitiveness index by 22.47%,—by 45.2%, GDP per capita—by 126.76% and the sustainable M. P. Pridachuk (B) Volgograd Institute of Management—A Branch of the Russian Academy, National Economy and Public Administration Under the President of the Russian Federation, Volgograd, Russia e-mail: [email protected] N. M. Alieva Dagestan State University, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A. A. Bisultanova Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_16

159

160

M. P. Pridachuk et al.

development index—by 8.13%. The control values of the factor variables required to implement the optimistic scenario are specified. Keywords System of factors · Sustainable development · Economy · Challenges of our time · Globalization · Diversification · Security · Developed countries · Developing countries · World economy · Forecast scenarios until 2030 JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction The priority of sustainable development for modern socio-economic systems determines the high relevance of the development of scientific theory and methodology for managing this process. The key factors in the functioning and development of the economy, which are most amenable to government regulation, deserve special attention. These factors include, first, globalization. During the second half of the twentieth century and the 1st decade of the twenty-first century, it was believed that the openness of the economy contributes to the acceleration of its development, as it increases competition in domestic markets. Under the influence of the global economic crisis that occurred in 2008 and the current crisis of 2020, the attitude towards globalization has changed—it began to be perceived as an additional risk of developing economic systems and is increasingly limited, replacing with regional trade and economic integration. Secondly, economic diversification. Before the 2008 crisis, the post-industrial economy dominated, and the monostructure of economic systems, which suggested their specialization in the service sector, was considered preferable. In the context of the global financial and economic recession, the economies with developed industries demonstrated the greatest stability, which laid the foundation for a new trend that manifested itself in the world economy in the second decade of the twentyfirst century—economic diversification. Global digitalization and the transition to industry 4.0, in turn, increased the importance of high-tech industries in the structure of the economy, also contributing to its diversification. Third, economic security. In the context of digitalization, cybernetic security related to the protection of personal data and digital information has been added to traditional military security (ability to maintain peace). In the context of the 2020 crisis, attention to security issues has increased even more and, obviously, in the next decade (until 2030) will be at the highest possible level. Although there is a paradigm view of the management of the listed factors of economic systems, this management is based on the provisions of the Theory of Economic Growth, while the consequences of these factors on sustainability and the preferred directions (stimulation or containment) of the management of these factors in order to implement the Theory of Sustainable Development are not defined. The

System of Factors for Sustainable Economic Development …

161

purpose of this chapter is to fill the identified gap by determining the impact of the system of key factors of the economy—globalization, diversification and security— on sustainable development, identifying the preferred directions for managing these factors and predicting their impact on the modern economy until 2030.

2 Materials and Method Traditional factors of sustainable economic development, including economic growth, innovation and corporate social and environmental responsibility, are discussed in the publications Abdelhalim and Eldin (2019), Bello and Othman (2020), Bili´nska-Reformat et al. (2019), Frolov et al. (2017), Inshakov et al. (2019), Milind and Rangarajan (2020), Morozova et al. (2019), Popkova et al. (2014), 2016, 2017, Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi et al. (2019a, b), Nikiforova and Yashchenko (2018), Borzenko (2018), Purtiev and Morozova (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). Some issues of the impact on the sustainability of economic systems of new factors arising from the challenges of our time, including globalization, diversification and security, are reflected in the studies of Andronova et al. (2019), Haabazoka et al. (2020), Ivanov et al. (2019), Petrenko and Stolyarov (2019), Pichkov (2016), Popkova (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2020), Popkova and Gulzat (2020), Popkova and Zmiyak (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2019), Pritvorova et al. (2018), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2003, 2019), Shulus et al. (2020). Therefore, there is no systematic understanding of the factors of sustainable economic development in the existing literature, and new factors—globalization, diversification and security—are poorly understood, and it requires further research. This research is based on the scripting method using the following algorithm. At the first stage, the regression relationships of the manifestations of sustainable development highlighted in Chaps. 1 and 2 of this book—the index of global competitiveness, economic growth rate, GDP per capita and the index of sustainable development—are determined from the new factors of sustainable development of the economy—the index of globalization, the index of peace (military security) and the cybersecurity index, as well as the share of the predominant industry (services) in the structure of GDP as an indicator of economic diversification. Regression relationships are described as component models of multiple linear regression of the form y = b + a1 * x1 + a2 * x2 + a3 * x3 + a4 * x4, multiple determination coefficient (R), as well as significance F (to determine the validity of regression models at the significance level α = 0.05). At the second stage, automatic predictions of changes in values of factor variables for the period until 2030 are made based on their arithmetic and standard deviations in 2020 by generating 100 random numbers for each variable, as well as constructing histograms of their normal distribution.

162

M. P. Pridachuk et al.

At the third stage, scenarios for the sustainable development of the economy are drawn up depending on the influence of the selected factors on it, and the likelihood of their implementation is also determined. Both developed countries (G7 example) and developing countries (BRICS example) have been selected as targets for the study to obtain a representative sample. The initial statistics for 2020 are shown in Table 1. For the convenience of subsequent calculations, indicator designations have been introduced.

3 Results The regression results required for the scenario simulation are shown in Table 2. In all the models obtained, as it can be seen from Table 1, the relationship of the indicators is very strong, as evidenced by a correlation (multiple R) of 69% to 95%. The significance of F in almost all models does not exceed 0.05, therefore, these models are reliable at the significance level α = 0.05. The prediction of change in factor variables (x1–x4) is given in Fig. 1 as histograms of normal distribution. On the basis of the obtained forecast values of factor variables and their probabilities (in Fig. 1) and available regression dependencies (Table 2), Two scenarios of sustainable development of the world economy for the period up to 2030 were compiled: • Realistic scenario: obtained on the basis of the most likely predictive values of factor variables under which dependent variables are calculated; • Optimistic scenario: obtained based on the desire to obtain the largest values of dependent variables taking into account the available probable values of factor variables (Table 3). The key characteristics of the resulting scenarios are shown graphically in Fig. 2. As it can be seen from Fig. 2, the realistic scenario implies a decline in all indicators of sustainable development and is therefore negative. Its probability is on average 22.50%. The optimistic scenario provides an increase in all indicators of sustainable development, its probability is estimated at 12.75%.

4 Conclusion The research revealed that the systemic influence of the new ones—globalization, diversification and security—due to the challenges of our time determines the negative realistic (most likely: 22.50%) scenario of sustainable development of the world economy for the period until 2030, which implies a decrease in the value of the global competitiveness index by 3.78%, economic growth rate—by 48.85%, GDP per capita—by 15.21% and the sustainable development index—by 0.04%.

70.12

3.093

72.45

Canada

2.605

62.10 2.399

2.217

2.271

2.401

Country

USA

1.801

1.369

65.08

82.41

Great Britain

China

89.84

Japan

1.754

60.52

78.59

Italy

1.892 1.547

Brazil

83.37

Germany

0.652

0.836

0.719

0.828

0.577

0.926

0.931

0.880

0.837

0.849

0.918

0.892

x3

Cyber security Index points from 1

61.0

54.1

49.1

52.2

62.6

77.4

77.0

69.1

66.3

61.8

70.3

51.6

x4

Share of the predominant sector of the economya and its GDP structure, %

62.4

66.7

61.4

73.9

60.9

83.7

81.2

82.3

71.5

81.8

78.8

79.6

y1

Global competitiveness Index, points 1–100

2.198

1.500

7.791

6.000

1.954

2.121

1.606

0.846

0.800

1.415

1.749

1.843

y2

Economic growth rate, %

5,790.651

11,558.835

2,173.500

9,850.988

11,110.946

64,212.535

38,965.146

40,542.057

30,941.744

43,372.885

39,121.158

45,845.251

y3

GDP per capita, US $

61.5

70.9

61.1

73.2

70.6

74.5

79.4

78.9

75.8

81.1

81.5

77.9

y4

Sustainable development Index, points 1–100

all selected countries, services are the predominant sector of the economy Source Compiled by authors based on materials Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), Institute for Economics & Peace (2020), International Telecommunication Union (2020), KOF Swiss Economic Institute (2020), and World Bank (2020)

a In

BRICS countries (developing)

87.25

88.60

France

x2 1.327

x1

71.71

Canada

Countries of G7 (developed)

Peace index, points 1–4

Globalization Index, points 1–100

Country

Category

Table 1 Statistics on the sustainable development of the economy and its factors: globalization, diversification and security in the selected countries in 2020

System of Factors for Sustainable Economic Development … 163

164

M. P. Pridachuk et al.

Table 2 Regression analysis of the dependence of the manifestations of sustainable development on its factors Characteristics of regression dependences

Characteristic value in regression model (dependent variable) y1

Multiple R Significance F

y2

Arithmetic average

y3

0.9542

0.6933

0.0009

0.2707

y4 0.8854 0.0175

−65225.97

Standard deviation

Independent variables

0.8781

–

–

0.0175

–

–

–

–

b

32.75

8.15

a1

−0.11

−0.12

−223.07

0.12

76.00

10.43

a2

−5.71

0.80

−11169.90

−5.53

2.06

0.53

a3

57.53

6.25

95720.50

24.27

0.82

0.11

0.22

−0.05

880.94

0.06

62.71

9.7

73.68

2.49

28623.81

73.87

–

–

a4 Arithmetic mean of dependent variable

52.47

Histogram of Globolization Index

19 11

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

25 20 15 10 5 0

22

14

14

9

5 1

Periodicity

25 20 15 10 5 0

Periodicity

Periodicity

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

3

1

Periodicity

25 20 15 10 5 0

19

21 15

6 1

0

9 4

16 1

2

13

10 12 9

6

4

Histogram of the predominant industry

Histogram of the Cybersecurity index 22

Histogram of Peace index 26

2

18 12 1

3

20 15 10

6

9 5

Fig. 1 Predicting change in factor variables. Source Calculated and built by the authors

An optimistic scenario is also quite likely (12.75%), providing an increase in the value of the global competitiveness index by 22.47%, economic growth rate by 45.2%, GDP per capita by 126.76% and the sustainable development index by 8.13%. To do this, it is necessary to reduce the value of the globalization index by 13.15% and the peace (military security) index by 20.25%, as well as increase the value of

System of Factors for Sustainable Economic Development …

165

Table 3 Scenario analysis of sustainable development of the world economy for the period up to 2030 Variable The average Realistic scenario Optimistic scenario value of the Variable Probability, Gain, % Variable Probability, Gain, % variable in value % value % 2020 x1

76.00

84.39

22

11.03

66.01

−13.15

11

x2

2.06

2.13

26

3.58

1.64

16

−20.25

x3

0.82

0.79

22

−3.71

0.99

15

20.67

x4

62.71

64.13

20

2.27

77.66

9

23.84

y1

73.68

y2

2.49

y3

28,623.81

(22 + 26 + −3.78 22 + 20)/4 −48.85 = 22.50 24,271.03 −15.21

y4

73.87

73.84

70.90 1.27

−0.04

(11 + 16 + 22.47 15 + 9)/4 45.82 = 12.75 64,907.60 126.76 90.24

3.62

79.87

8.13

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

126.76

140 120 100 80 60

45.82

40 20 11.03 0 -20 -40

x1 -13.15

20.67 3.58 x2 x3 -3.71 -20.25

23.84 2.27 x4

-60

22.47 y1 -3.78

8.13 y2

y3 -15.21

y4 -0.04

-48.85 Realistic scenario

Optimistic scenario

Fig. 2 Scenarios for the sustainable development of the world economy for the period up to 2030. Source Calculated and drawn by the authors

the cybersecurity index by 20.67%, as well as the share of the predominant industry (services) in the structure of GDP (economic diversification) by 23.84%.

References Abdelhalim K, Eldin A (2019) Can CSR help achieve sustainable development? Applying a new assessment model to CSR cases from Egypt. Int J Sociol Soc Policy 39(9/10):773–795. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-06-2019-0120

166

M. P. Pridachuk et al.

Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Degtereva EA, Zobov AM, Starostin VS (2019) Activity of Russian companies of the agri-food sector in regional industrial value-added chains. Adv Syst Sci Appl 19(1):31–43 Bello I, Othman M (2020) Multinational corporations and sustainable development goals: examining Etisalat telecommunication intervention in Nigeria’s basic education. Int J Educ Manage 34(1):96–110. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2019-0103 Bili´nska-Reformat K, Kucharska B, Twardzik M, Dolega L (2019) Sustainable development concept and creation of innovative business models by retail chains. Int J Retail Distrib Manage 47(1):2– 18. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2017-0071 Borzenko KV (2018) Konkurentnaya sreda kak osnova aktivizaciyi marketinga prganizacii zdravookhraneniya v sovremennoi Rossii [Competitive environment as a basis for intensifying the marketing of healthcare organizations in modern Russia]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XX All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “marketing and pr: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35-2018-xx/581-konkurentnaya-sredakak-osnova-aktivizatsii-marketinga-organizatsij-zdravookhraneniya-v-sovremennoj-rossii. Data accessed: 5 May 2020 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of Elinor Ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Haabazoka L, Tendedziso L, Mwanaumo E, Musonda N, Mambwe M (2020) Determinants of the petroleum fuel supply chain performance in Zimbabwe: a case of the national oil infrastructure company. In: Aigbavboa C, Thwala W (eds) The construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. CIDB 2019. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_58 Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. Lect Notes Netw Syst 44:135– 148 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the National Positive and Soft Law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute for Economics & Peace (2020) Global peace index 2019: measuring peace in a complex world. http://visionofhumanity.org/app/uploads/2019/06/GPI-2019-web003.pdf. Data accessed: 8 May 2020 Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set. Data accessed: 8 May 2020 International Telecommunication Union (2020) Global cybersecurity index ranking 2018. https:// www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Cybersecurity/Pages/global-cybersecurity-index.aspx. Data accessed: 8 May 2020 Ivanov O, Zavyalova E, Ryazantsev S (2019) Public-private partnership in the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union. Central Asia and the Caucasus. English Edition, vol 2, no 2, pp 33–47 Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The platform of information and economic security of the Russian Industrial Enterprises. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):123–129

System of Factors for Sustainable Economic Development …

167

KOF Swiss Economic Institute (2020) Globalisation index—2019. https://kof.ethz.ch/en/forecastsand-indicators/indicators/kof-globalisation-index.html. Data accessed: 8 May 2020 Milind KJ, Rangarajan K (2020) The approach of Indian corporates towards sustainable development: an exploration using sustainable development goals based model. Sustain Dev. https://doi. org/10.1002/sd.2053 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrep Manage J 15(2):589–597 Nikiforova ME, Yashchenko SO (2018) Raschet energeticheskoi effektivnosti ispolzovaniya solnechnikh batarei v stroitelnom komplekse [Calculation of energy efficiency of using solar panels in the construction complex of Volgograd]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XIX All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “theoretical and methodological foundations for the development of the construction complex”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/342018-xix/580-raschet-energeticheskoj-effektivnosti-ispolzovaniya-solnechnykh-batarej-v-stroit elnom-komplekse-g-volgograda. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Petrenko E, Stolyarov N (2019) Features of the management of international projects, taking into account intercultural differences of the partners. Entrep Sustain Iss 6(4):2037–2051. https://doi. org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(34) Pichkov OB (2016) Social inequality in the US and Canada. International Trends (Mezhdunarodnye protsessy) 2(3):85–92 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and Legal Foundations of Modern Russian Society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG (2019) Preconditions of formation and development of industry 4.0 in the conditions of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169(1):65–72 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020) Technological revolution in the 21st century: digital society vs. artificial intelligence. Lect Notes Netw Syst 91:339–345 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety vs. rationality. Springer International Publishing, Berlin Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human capital and AI in Industry 4.0. convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. J Intell Capital, In Press Popkova EG, Zmiyak KV (2019) Priorities of training of digital personnel for industry 4.0: social competencies vs technical competencies. On the Horizon 27(3–4):138–144 Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of Healthcare Organizations: Technologies of Public-Private Partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pritvorova T, Tasbulatova B, Petrenko E (2018) Possibilities of blitz-psychograms as a tool for human resource management in the supporting system of hardiness of company. Entrep Sustain Iss 6(2):840–853. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.2(25) Purtiev MN, Morozova IA (2018) Konkurentosposobnosti proizvoditelei lekarstvennikh sredstv s tochki zreniya koncepcii innovacionnoi kulturi [Competitiveness of drug manufacturers in terms of innovative culture. In Popkova EG (ed)] INSSCCOM18. XX All-Russian electronic

168

M. P. Pridachuk et al.

seminar-conference “marketing and PR: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab. online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35-2018-xx/582-konkurentosposobnost-proizvoditelej-lekarstve nnykh-sredstv-s-tochki-zreniya-kontseptsii-innovatsionnoj-kultury. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Sergi BS (2003) Economic dynamics in transitional economies: the four-P governments, the EU enlargement, and the bruxelles consensus. Routledge, New York Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Bogoviz AV, Litvinova TN (2019) Understanding Industry 4.0: AI, the internet of things, and the future of work. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 313–339 Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. Lect Notes Netw Syst 92:353–359 World Bank (2020) World development indicators: structure of output. http://wdi.worldbank.org/ table/4.2. Data accessed: 8 May 2020

Fiscal Aspect of Ensuring Sustainable Development of the Region’s Economy in Modern Conditions Valentina M. Sharapova , Sabina R. Shakhbanova , and Aza A. Bisultanova

Abstract Purpose The purpose of the research is to determine the influence of tax and non-tax budgetary factors on ensuring the sustainable development of the territory’s economy on the example of the regions of modern Russia. Design/Methodology/Approach The work uses a set of methods of economic analysis (economic statistics). At the first stage, the correlation of revenues allocated in the structure of the regional budget with indicators of sustainable development is determined. At the second stage, descriptive statistics of the obtained correlation coefficients are compiled to determine the average impact of tax and budgetary factors on the stability of the development of the region’s economy, as well as the reliability of the obtained averages. The top 5 regions of Russia with a positive ratio of the territorial budget balance to its tax and non-tax revenues (surplus), as well as the top 5 regions with a negative balance (deficit) were selected as objects for the research. Findings On the example of the regions of modern Russia, it is justified that the fiscal aspect of ensuring the sustainable development of the region’s economy in modern conditions. In deficit regions, the key fiscal factors of economic stability are the income tax of organizations (average correlation with indicators of sustainable development: 30.98%), and in surplus regions - property taxes (36.89%). Originality/Value The revealed, large variation of the obtained correlation coefficients between regions with the same balance category (positive or negative) indicates that a universal scientific and methodological approach to managing the fiscal factors of the sustainable development of the region’s economy cannot be formed and this approach should be selected separately for each region due to the pronounced specificity of the influence of these factors. V. M. Sharapova (B) Ural State Agrarian University, Yekaterinburg, Russia e-mail: [email protected] S. R. Shakhbanova Dagestan State University, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A. A. Bisultanova Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_17

169

170

V. M. Sharapova et al.

Keywords Fiscal aspect · Sustainable development · Regional economy · Modern russia · Regions of russia · Deficit regions · Surplus regions JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction The fiscal aspect of ensuring the sustainable development of the region’s economy in modern conditions is characterized by a contradiction due to the fact that, on the one hand, finance is one of the components of the regional economy that directly determine its sustainability. Thus, in the proposed systematic (“broad”) interpretation of the sustainability of the territory (region) proposed and used in this book (in Chap. 3), the financial flows of the region are among the direct indicators of its sustainability. In particular, this is the balance of income and expenses of the consolidated regional budget, as well as the aggregated balance of regional entrepreneurship. On the other hand, the region’s financial resources determine the non-financial components of its economy’s sustainability. For example, the deficit-free regional budget allows it to fully provide resource support for the implementation of sustainable development goals in the region. Similarly, the profitability of enterprises in the region allows them to invest more in sustainable development, in combating climate change and to exercise greater corporate social and environmental responsibility. Conversely, financial shortfalls at the public and corporate levels are, in most cases, inevitably linked to underfunding of sustainable development goals. The example focuses on traditional manifestations of sustainability, although the indicated pattern is also characteristic of the new manifestations of economic sustainability highlighted in this book (including human development). The described contradiction updates the scientific and practical problem of studying the fiscal aspect of ensuring the sustainable development of the region’s economy in modern conditions. This determined the setting of the goal of this study, related to the determination of the influence of tax and non-tax budgetary factors on ensuring the sustainable development of the territory’s economy on the example of the regions of modern Russia.

2 Materials and Method The general fundamental and applied issues of the sustainable development of the region’s economy under modern conditions are considered in the works of scientists such as Andronova et al. (2019), Avery (2018), Chalhoub (2018), Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka (2019), Inshakov et al. (2019), Lawanda (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2003, 2019),

Fiscal Aspect of Ensuring Sustainable Development …

171

Sergi et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Tripathi et al. (2020). The specifics of ensuring the sustainable development of the region’s economy in modern conditions are affected in publications by authors such as Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014), 2016, 2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Nikiforova and Yashchenko (2018), Borzenko (2018), Purtiev and Morozova (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). While some aspects of ensuring the sustainable development of the region’s economy under current conditions are addressed in existing publications, the fiscal aspect is not sufficiently explored and requires further study. To this end, a set of methods of economic analysis (economic statistics) is used in this work. The study is carried out in two consecutive stages. The first step is to determine the correlation of the revenues allocated in the regional budget structure with the indicators of sustainable development identified in Chap. 3 of this book. At the second stage, descriptive statistics of the obtained correlation coefficients are compiled to determine the average impact of tax and budgetary factors on the stability of the development of the region’s economy, as well as the reliability of the obtained averages. For the purposes of the research top-5 regions of Russia with the positive relation of balance of the territorial budget to its tax and non-tax income (surplus) and also top-5 regions with negative balance (deficiency) according to materials of RiaReyting (2020) were chosen. The manifestations of sustainable development in the sample regions are given in Table 1, and the structure of regional budget revenues is given in Table 2.

3 Results The results of the correlation analysis are shown in Figs. 1 and 2. Descriptive statistics of the obtained correlation coefficients are given in Table 3. The correlation with the Gini index and the labor market tension coefficient (from the value the smaller, the better and therefore the inverse/negative correlation is preferable) are taken modulo so as not to distort the descriptive statistics. As shown in Table 1, in regions with a surplus, property taxes (average correlation of 30.98%) are the most significant tax and budgetary factor in the sustainability of the economy. However, the standard error is quite large (23.83), which indicates a large spread of indicator values. Standard deviation indicates that with normal distribution, 95% of cases are expected to be within 68 standard deviations from the mean (very large variation). The sample dispersion of 4542.35 also indicates a large spread. The process shows that the relative weight of the “tail” of the normal distribution relative to its central part is 0.45. A negative asymmetricity value (−1.30) indicates that the size of the left “tail” of the distribution is larger than the right (relative to the average). The

0.371

0.423

Ryazan Oblast

Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug

0.368

0.358

0.354

Orel Oblast

Kostroma Oblast

Tomsk Oblast

0.351

Kabardino-Balkarian Republic

Republic of Mordovia 0.357

0.354

Vologda Oblast

2.4

2.8

5.1

11.7

3.0

0.6

2.0

2.0

3.7 189.4

0.352

Republic of Dagestan 0.389

Kemerovo Oblast

1.74

1.64

1.87

1.84

1.55

1.44

3.18

1.78

1.75

2.29

13.4

16.7

2.7

8.4

3.9

7.0

0.2

8.5

4.9

13.4 31,164

8783 6315 53,021

−3187.1 −5971.4

−801

−2709.2

−62,558

−2697

384,506

479,757

260,381

311,352

163,314

265,177

4078,018

319,968

462,572

210,103

401,058

341,243

257,398

GRP per capita, rub.

−11,920

−10,062

15,243.5

4223.3

6913.9

3696

20,859.6

Business balancea , mln RUB

Regional budget balance, mln RUB

Admission to universities, thousands of people.

Economic security Standard of living of the populationa

Gini coefficient (the smaller, the better)

Labour market tension ratio (the smaller the better)

Human development

0.10

1.10

1.03

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.04

1.02

1.05

1.02

Economic growth, %

Ecology

Ratio of monetary income of the population to the value of a fixed set of consumer goods and services according to the results of 2017 a Settled financial result of enterprises Source Compiled by authors based on Green Patrol (2020), Institute of scientific communications (2020), RiaReyting (2020), and Rosstat (2020)

Top 5 with negative balance (deficit)

Top 5 with positive balance (surplus)

Balance Territory (region) to budget income ratio

Table 1 Manifestations of the sustainable development of the top 5 surplus and top 5 deficit regions of Russia in 2020

56

55

52

58

49

52

58

57

56

53

Ecological index, %

172 V. M. Sharapova et al.

33,969.8

28,845.0

65,123.1

Kostroma Oblast

Tomsk Oblast

29,390.4

Orel Oblast

39,853.4

Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug

Kabardino-Balkarian Republic

59,398.8

184,358.4

Ryazan Oblast

Republic of Mordovia

72,109.1

Vologda Oblast

11,776.7

4788.9

4145.6

1790.8

3349.0

54,242.4

11,015.0

15,452.5

4246.5

50,205.5

18.08

16.60

12.20

6.09

8.40

29.42

18.54

21.43

3.96

30.08

19,999.4

8093.9

9024.0

4955.8

9199.0

50,443.9

16,945.3

19,702.8

12,486.3

43,314.9

RUB million

RUB million

%

Income tax

Corporate income tax

30.71

28.06

26.56

16.86

23.08

27.36

28.53

27.32

11.64

25.95

%

8622.0

2754.9

3483.2

2306.9

3666.7

65,777.4

7636.0

13,374.7

5109.7

14,678.1

RUB million

Property tax

13.24

9.55

10.25

7.85

9.20

35.68

12.86

18.55

4.76

8.79

%

12,673.0

7079.6

10,939.7

15,351.8

12,637.2

3638.9

12,371.2

9586.8

74,785.7

23,628.1

RUB million

19.46

24.54

32.20

52.23

31.71

1.97

20.83

13.29

69.71

14.16

%

Non-reimbursable income

of monetary income of the population to the value of a fixed set of consumer goods and services according to the results of 2017, times b Settled financial result of enterprises Source Compiled by the authors based on the materials of Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) (2020)

a Ratio

Top 5 with negative balance (deficit)

166,917.9

107,278.3

Republic of Dagestan

Top 5 with positive balance (surplus)

Kemerovo Oblast

Total revenues, million rubles

Balance to Territory (region) budget income ratio

Table 2 The structure of revenues of the regional budget of the top 5 surplus and top 5 deficit regions of Russia in 2020

18.51

21.24

18.77

16.96

27.60

5.56

19.25

19.40

9.93

21.02

%

Other income

Fiscal Aspect of Ensuring Sustainable Development … 173

174

V. M. Sharapova et al.

150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 -50.00

Gini coefficient Labour market Standard of tension ratio living of the (the smaller the population * better)

Admission to Regional budget Business GRP per capita, universities, balance, mln balance * *, mln rub. thousands of RUB RUB people.

Economic

Ecological

-100.00 -150.00 correlation with corporate income tax

correlation with personal income tax

correlation with property taxes

correlation with non-reimbursable income

correlation with other incomes

Fig. 1 Correlation of regional budget revenues with indicators of sustainable development in the top 5 regions with a surplus. Source Developed and compiled by the authors 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 -50.00

Gini coefficient Labour market Standard of tension ratio living of the (the smaller the population * better)

Admission to Regional budget Business GRP per capita, universities, balance, mln balance * *, mln rub. thousands of RUB RUB people.

Economic

Ecological

-100.00 -150.00 correlation with corporate income tax

correlation with personal income tax

correlation with property taxes

correlation with non-reimbursable income

correlation with other incomes

Fig. 2 Correlation of regional budget revenues with indicators of sustainable development in the top 5 regions with a negative balance. Source Developed and compiled by the authors

reliability level indicates that at the significance level α = 0.05, the probability of obtaining an average is 56.35%. The most significant tax and budgetary factor for the sustainability of the development of the economy in regions with a negative balance is the income tax of organizations (average correlation 36.89%). However, the standard error is quite large (16.84), which indicates a large spread of indicator values. Standard deviation indicates that with normal distribution, 95% of cases are expected to be within 48 standard deviations from the mean (very large variation).

Fiscal Aspect of Ensuring Sustainable Development …

175

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of the obtained correlation coefficients Balance Descriptive to budget statistics income ratio Top 5 with negative balance (deficit)

Income tax

Property taxes

Non-reimbursable income

Other income

Average

26.47

18.15

30.98

−25.38

−16.20

Standard error

20.33

17.12

23.83

19.87

21.76

Standard deviation

57.50

48.43

67.40

56.21

61.56

3306.72

2345.74

4542.35

3159.39

3789.35

Sample variance

Top 5 with negative balance (deficit)

Corporate income tax

Excess

−1.26

0.01

0.45

−0.77

−2.02

Asymmetry

−0.52

0.24

−1.30

0.49

−0.39

Reliability level (95.0%)

48.07

40.49

56.35

46.99

51.46

Average

36.89

31.61

29.58

−23.89

−28.54

Standard error

16.84

18.82

22.84

19.64

18.60

Standard deviation

47.63

53.22

64.59

55.55

52.61

2268.62

2832.68

4171.53

3085.88

2767.55

Sample variance

2.44

−0.65

0.32

−1.46

−1.29

Asymmetry

−1.57

−0.76

−0.88

0.24

0.39

Reliability level (95.0%)

39.82

44.50

54.00

46.44

43.98

Excess

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

The sample dispersion of 2268.62 also indicates a large spread. The process shows that the relative weight of the “tail” of the normal distribution relative to its central part is 2.44. A negative asymmetricity value (−1.57) indicates that the size of the left “tail” of the distribution is larger than the right (relative to the average). The reliability level indicates that at the significance level α = 0.05, the probability of obtaining an average is 39.82%.

4 Conclusion In such a way, on the example of the regions of modern Russia, it is justified that the fiscal aspect of ensuring the sustainable development of the region’s economy in modern conditions. In deficit regions, the key fiscal factors of economic stability are the income tax of organizations (average correlation with indicators of sustainable development: 30.98%), and in surplus regions - property taxes (36.89%).

176

V. M. Sharapova et al.

Nevertheless, the large spread of the obtained correlation coefficients between regions with the same balance category (positive or negative) indicates that a universal scientific and methodological approach to managing the fiscal factors of the sustainable development of the region’s economy cannot be formed and this approach should be selected separately for each region due to the pronounced specificity of the influence of these factors.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Degtereva EA, Zobov AM, Starostin VS (2019) Activity of Russian companies of the agri-food sector in regional industrial value-added chains. Adv Syst Sci Appl 19(1):31–43 Avery G (2018) Blueprint for implementing the UN’s sustainable development goals. Strateg Leader 46(5):52–53. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-09-2018-148 Borzenko KV (2018) Konkurentnaya sreda osnova aktivizacii marketinga organizacii zdrvoohraneniya v sovremennoi Rossi [Competitive environment as a basis for intensifying the marketing of healthcare organizations in modern Russia]. In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM18. XX All-Russian electronic seminar-conference “Marketing and PR: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35–2018-xx/581-konkurentnaya-sredakak-osnova-aktivizatsii-marketinga-organizatsij-zdravookhraneniya-v-sovremennoj-rossii. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Chalhoub M (2018) Cultural heritage in sustainable development: stone houses as environmental assets in the East Mediterranean. J Cult Heritage Manage Sustain Dev 8(1):30–46. https://doi. org/10.1108/JCHMSD-06-2017-0040 Frolov DP, Popkova EG, Strekalova AS, Marushchak IV (2017) Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of Elinor Ostrom’s principles in Russia. Contrib Econ 9783319552569:39–45 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Iss 4(3):269–278 Green Patrol (2020) Ekologicheskiy reiting regionov Rossii [Ecological rating of regions of Russia]. https://greenpatrol.ru/ru/stranica-dlya-obshchego-reytinga/ekologicheskiy-reyting-sub ektov-rf?tid=368. Data accessed: 10 May 2020 Haabazoka L (2019) Project finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (eds) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 57. Springer, Cham. Online ISBN 978-3-030-001025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Inshakov OV, Bogachkova LY, Popkova EG (2019) The transformation of the global energy markets and the problem of ensuring the sustainability of their development. Lect Notes Netw Syst 44:135– 148

Fiscal Aspect of Ensuring Sustainable Development …

177

Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Interactive statistics and intelligent analytics of the balanced state of the regional economy of Russia in terms of big data and blockchain— 2020”. http://archilab.online/en/data/date-set-on-the-regional-economy. Data accessed: 10 May 2020 Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The platform of information and economic security of the Russian Industrial Enterprises. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):123–129 Lawanda I (2019) The importance of information access of cultural values to the principles of sustainable development in climate change. Glob Knowl Mem Commun 69(1/2):9–19. https:// doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-03-2019-0044 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrep Manage J 15(2):589–597 Nikiforova ME, Yashchenko SO (2018) Raschet energeticheskoi effektivnosti ispolzovaniya solnechnikh batarei v stroitelnom komplekse g. Volgograda [Calculation of energy efficiency of using solar panels in the construction complex of Volgograd]. In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM18. XIX All-Russian Electronic Seminar—conference “Theoretical and methodological foundations for the development of the construction complex”. http://archilab.online/konfer entsii-2018-goda/34-2018-xix/580-raschet-energeticheskoj-effektivnosti-ispolzovaniya-solnec hnykh-batarej-v-stroitelnom-komplekse-g-volgograda. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Petrenko E, Pritvorova T, Dzhazykbaeva B (2018) Sustainable development processes: service sector in post-industrial economy. J Secur Sustain Iss 7(4):781–791. https://jssidoi.org/jssi/pap ers/papers/view/309 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of Modern Russian Society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Dubova YI, Yakovleva EA, Azarova NA, Titova EV (2014) Role of ecological marketing in formation and development of ecological cluster. Asian Soc Sci 10(23):1–8 Popkova EG, Shakhovskaya LS, Abramov SA, Natsubidze AS (2016) Ecological clusters as a tool of improving the environmental safety in developing countries. Environ Dev Sustain 18(4):1049– 1057 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Purtiev MN, Morozova IA (2018) Konkurentnosposobnosti proizvoditelei lekarstvennikh sredstv s tochki zreniya koncepcii innovazionnoi kulturi [Competitiveness of drug manufacturers in terms of innovative culture. In Popkova EG (ed)]. INSSCCOM18. XX All-Russian Electronic Seminar—conference “Marketing and PR: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab. online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35-2018-xx/582-konkurentosposobnost-proizvoditelej-lekarstve nnykh-sredstv-s-tochki-zreniya-kontseptsii-innovatsionnoj-kultury. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174

178

V. M. Sharapova et al.

Ragulina YV, Semenova EI, Avkopashvili PT, Dmitrieva EA, Cherepukhin TY (2019) Top-priority directions of implementing new internet technologies on the territories of rapid economic development. Adv Intell Syst Comput 726:182–188 RiaReyting (2020). Reiting socialno-ekonocheskogo pologeniya regionov Rossii [Rating of the socio-economic situation of the regions of Russia]. https://riarating.ru/infografika/20180523/630 091878.html. Data accessed: 10 May 2020 Rosstat (2020) Regioni Rossii. Socialno-ekonomicheski pokazateli [Regions of Russia. Socioeconomic indicators]. https://www.gks.ru/bgd/regl/b18_14p/Main.htm. Data accessed: 10 May 2020 Sergi BS (2003) Economic dynamics in transitional economies: the four-P Governments, the EU enlargement, and the bruxelles consensus. Routledge, New York Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Borzenko KV, Przhedetskaya NV (2019) Public-private partnerships as a mechanism of financing sustainable development. In: Ziolo M, Sergi BS (eds) Financing sustainable development: key challenges and prospects, pp 313–339. Palgrave Macmillan, London Tripathi D, Priyadarshi P, Kumar P, Kumar S (2020) Micro-foundations for sustainable development: leadership and employee performance. Int J Organ Anal 28(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJOA-01-2019-1622 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia and the Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Human Capital Management as a Basis for Global Mobility for Sustainable Economic Development Arsen S. Abdulkadyrov , Irina Y. Eremina, and Alyona V. Chuprova

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this work is to determine the impact of global mobility on the sustainability of the economy, as well as to develop recommendations for human capital management to optimize migration flows from a sustainable development perspective. Design/Methodology/Approach The authors conduct optimization modeling according to the following sequence of steps in order to develop a scientific approach to human capital management as a basis for global mobility for the sustainable development of the economy. At the first step, the regression analysis determines the dependence of indicators of sustainable development on migration flow. The second step determines the dependence of the migration flow on the indicators of human capital management—a model of multiple linear regression is compiled. In the third step, the optimal migration flow is determined by the expert method and by averaging. In the fourth step, the simplex method reveals the values of human capital management indicators, at which the optimal value of migration flow is achieved. Findings It was revealed that optimization allows increasing of the global competitiveness index by 2.35 times, the economic growth rate by 3.09 times, GDP per capita—by 26.23 times, but the sustainable development index will decrease by 0.27 times. Originality/Value It is justified that international migration in the modern world economy as a whole contributes to the sustainable development of national economic systems. It improves the global competitiveness of the economy, accelerates economic growth and increases GDP per capita, but impedes the achievement of sustainable development goals. The results of modeling and optimization showed that the optimal migration flow in the world economy on average is 321.2 people per 1000 people of the population. To achieve it, recommendations on human capital management are proposed. A. S. Abdulkadyrov (B) Dagestan State University of National Economy, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] I. Y. Eremina · A. V. Chuprova Gubkin Russian State University (NIU) of Oil and Gas, Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] A. V. Chuprova e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_18

179

180

A. S. Abdulkadyrov et al.

Keywords Governance · Human capital · Human development · Basis · Global mobility · International migration · Sustainable development · Economy JEL Code C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction Global migration is a significant factor in the sustainable development of the national economy. In the classical (“narrow”—limited to the implementation of sustainable development goals) interpretation of the sustainability of the economy, migration as a source of change is negatively perceived. This is particularly the case for inbound migratory flows, under the influence of which public resources are redistributed to a larger number of people, which reduces living standards, as well as increases in consumption and waste of economic activity. In a new (“broad”) interpretation of sustainability that goes beyond the goals of sustainable development, migration is not unequivocally assessed, and its impact on economic sustainability is interpreted depending on the context. From the point of view of the Theory of Systems, migration is an attractor that brings the economic system to a state of bifurcation (uncertainty). Leaving this state is associated with the implementation of one of two alternatives that lead to the establishment of a new equilibrium of the system. The first alternative: the leakage of valuable human resources. This happens if the economy is in a demographic crisis (population decline), needs personnel to accelerate economic growth, and also if the outbound migration flow is formed from representatives of responsible consumption or highly skilled personnel (for example, digital personnel in the digital economy) for the preparation of which significant resources of the economic system are spent and which it cannot fill in the medium term. Migration then impedes sustainable development. The second alternative is the outflow of people impeding sustainable development. We are talking about low-skilled personnel that increase unemployment, as well as irresponsible consumers, the maintenance of which takes a lot of resources of the economic system, and their economic activities are associated with unreasonably large production waste. This is also characteristic of an economy experiencing an excess of population (overpopulated). Migration then contributes to sustainable development. In connection with the rationale for a new interpretation of the sustainability of the economy, the problem of studying the impact of global mobility on sustainable development was updated. The aim of this work is to determine the impact of global mobility on the sustainability of the economy, as well as to develop recommendations for human capital management to optimize migration flows from a sustainable development perspective.

Human Capital Management as a Basis for Global Mobility …

181

2 Materials and Method The theory and practice of human capital management, as well as the contribution of this management to the regulation of global migration flows, is discussed in the works of Goyal and Sergi (2015), Petrenko and Stolyarov (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2020), Popkova and Zmiyak (2019), Pritvorova et al. (2018), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Sergi et al. (2019), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Nikiforova and Yashchenko (2018), Borzenko (2018), Purtiev and Morozova (2018). The specificity of the regulation of global population mobility for the sustainable development of the economy from the point of view of its classical (“narrow”) interpretation, which consists in limiting incoming migration flows, is reflected in the publications of Andronova et al. (2019), Haabazoka (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Popkova et al. (2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Sergi (2018), Tripathi et al. (2020), Zhang et al. (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Alekseev et al. (2018), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturian et al. (2020), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). A literature review has shown that the need to manage human capital to manage migration flows has been confirmed by numerous studies. However, a scientific approach to human capital management as a basis for global mobility for sustainable economic development has not been developed. To develop it in this work, optimization modeling is carried out according to the following sequence of steps. At the first step, the regression analysis determines the dependence of the indicators of sustainable development justified in the second chapter of this book—the index of global competitiveness, the rate of economic growth, GDP per capita and the index of sustainable development—on migration flow (according to UNDP). To do this, regression curves are built. Starting data for 2020 are shown in Table 1. The second step determines the dependence of the migration flow on the indicators of human capital management—a model of multiple linear regression is compiled. Their initial values are shown in Table 2. In the third step, the target values of indicators of sustainable development are determined by the expert method and in each individual case the migration flow at which these values are achieved is determined. As a result, the arithmetic mean is calculated—this is how the optimal migration flow is determined. In the fourth step, the simplex method reveals the values of human capital management indicators, at which the optimal value of migration flow is achieved. To ensure the representativeness of the research and obtain the most accurate and reliable results, the top 5 countries of the global human development rating of UNDP in 2020 (according to the results of 2019), as well as the average 5 countries of this rating, are chosen to cover all categories of countries in terms of human capital development.

182

A. S. Abdulkadyrov et al.

Table 1 Statistics on sustainable development and global migration in the chosen countries in 2020 HDI rating polo

Country

Top 5 Norway countries Switzerland of HDI Ireland rating Germany Australia Averages UAE

Global Economic GDP per competitiveness growth capita, US index, points rate, % $ 1–100

Sustainable development index, points 1–100

Migration flow per one thousand people. population, peoplea

78.1

2.098

76,527.780 80.7

5.3

82.3

1.600

79,855.924 78.8

6.1

75.1

3.014

66,520.569 78.2

4.9

81.8

1.415

43,372.885 81.1

6.6

78.7

2.945

59,120.036 73.9

6.4

75.0

3.318

42,661.016 69.7

4.2

Saudi Arabia

70.0

1.991

22,650.657 64.8

4.1

Qatar

72.9

2.311

73,950.054 66.3

14.7

Chile

70.5

2.700

14,595.095 75.6

6.0

Russia

66.7

1.500

11,558.835 70.9

1.3

a Net

migration rate (per 1000 people) Source Compiled by authors based on materials Institute of Scientific Communications (2020), and UNDP (2020)

3 Results Based on the data from Table 1, the following regression curves are built (Fig. 1). Figure 1 shows that with an increase in migration flow by 1 person. per 1 thousand people, the global competitiveness index rises by 0.321 points, the economic growth rate rises by 0.0152%, GDP per capita increases by $3,928.7, but the sustainable development index declines by 0.2977 points. Consequently, the impact of global migration on the sustainability of the economy is mixed. The dependence of migration flow (x) on human capital management indicators is described by the following model of multiple linear regression: x = −20.185 − 13.41 * z1 + 21.98 * z2 + 9.48 * z3 + 45.51 * z4 − 0.16 * z5 − 0.30 * z6. The expert method determined the target values of indicators of sustainable development: the global competitiveness index should increase 1.25 times, the economic growth rate— 3 times, GDP per capita—1.25 times and the sustainable development index—1.02 times. The objects and the optimization condition are shown in Table 3. Based on Table 3, the average arithmetic value of x under isolated optimization is calculated: (64.46 + 1211.26 + 9.08 + 0)/4 = 321.2 is the optimal value of x. Under it, the global competitiveness index increases by 2.35 times, the economic growth rate—by 3.09 times, GDP per capita—by 26.23 times, but the sustainable development index decreases by 0.27 times. The simplex method determined the

0.794

0.661

0.807

0.832

Saudi Arabia

Qatar

Chile

Russia

0.923

Australia

0.744

0.946

Germany

UAE

0.918

Ireland

0.985

0.834

0.815

1.000

0.937

0.983

0.920

0.929

0.955

0.965

0.743

0.673

n/a

n/a

n/a

0.862

0.861

0.872

0.881

0.889

z3

Inequality-adjusted HDI

of indicator the smaller, the better (shows deviation from gender parity) Source Compiled by authors based on materials of UNDP (2020)

a Value

Average 5 countries of HDI rating

0.919

z2

z1

0.896

Top 5 countries of HDI rating

Income index

Index of income, Equity index, shares shares from 1 from 1

Education index

Switzerland

–

–

Education index, shares from 1

Norway

Country

Position in HDI rating

Table 2 Human capital management statistics in the chose countries in 2020

1.015

0.962

1.043

0.879

0.965

0.975

0.968

0.975

0.963

0.990

z4

Gender development index (GDI)

Index of gender equality, shares from 1 a

59.1

57.9

86.8

53.2

80.9

61.5

58.5

58.0

64.9

61.0

z5

Employment to population ratio

Employment of the population, %

96.4

70.3

43.9

58.6

52.8

78.9

87.4

84.9

86.5

84.3

z6

Skilled labour force (% of labour force)

Proportion of skilled workers, % of the workforce

Human Capital Management as a Basis for Global Mobility … 183

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

y = 0.321x + 73.197 R² = 0.0456

5 10 15 20 Migration flow for a population of 1000 people

90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0

y = 3928.7x + 25666 R² = 0.2706

Sustainability index, points 1-100

0

GDP per cap. US $

Economy development rating, %

A. S. Abdulkadyrov et al.

Global Competivness index, points

184

0 5 10 15 20 Migration flow for a population of 1000 people

3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1

y = 0.0152x + 2.1989 R² = 0.0059

0.5 0 0

5 10 15 20 Migration flow for a population of 1000 people

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

y = -0.2977x + 75.774 R² = 0.0305

0 5 10 15 20 6 Migration flow for a population of 1000 people

Fig. 1 Regression curves of the dependence of indicators of sustainable development on migration flow in the sample countries in 2020. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors Table 3 Objects and optimization condition Dependent variable (optimization object)

Base Isolated optimization (maximizing (average) each y individually) value of y in 2020 Scenario Increase in x value target of y target required to value y reach the from base target value value of y

Complex optimization (optimization condition: x = 321.2) Scenario target of y

Increase in target value y from base value

y1

75.11

93.89

1.25

64.46

176.30

y2

2.29

6.87

3.00

1,211.26

7.08

3.09

y3

49,081.29

61,351.61

1.25

9.08

1,287,564.44

26.23

y4

74.00

75.77

1.02

0.00

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

2.35

−19.85 −0.27

Human Capital Management as a Basis for Global Mobility …

185

optimization toolkit—target values of human development indicators, at which x = 321.2 is achieved (Table 4). The combined optimization results are shown in Fig. 2. As shown in Fig. 2, optimization suggests that the education index should increase by 0.55 times, the income index—by 3.77 times, the equity index—by 2.92 times, the gender equality index—bby 6.48 times, and the employment of the population and the share of skilled workers—shall remain unchanged. Table 4 Optimization range of tools Optimization tool

Base (average) value in 2020

Target scenario

Increase in target value compared to base value

Education index, shares from 1

0.84

0.47

0.55

Index of income, shares from 1

0.93

3.51

3.77

Equity index, shares from 1

0.58

1.69

2.92

Index of gender equality, shares from 1

0.97

6.31

6.48

Employment of the population,

64.18

64.16

1.00

Percentage of skilled workers, % of the workforce

74.40

74.36

1.00

Source Calculated and compiled by the authors Optimization range of tools

Objects and conditions for optimization Migration flow

Education Index Proportion of qualified workers

0.55 1.00 1.00

Employment of the population

3.77

Sustainable Development Index

Income index

53.89 -0.27

GDP per capita

26.23

2.92 Equity Index

Economic growth rate

3.09

Global Competitiveness Index

2.35

6.48 Gender Equality Index

Fig. 2 Results of the optimization of human capital management as a basis for global mobility for sustainable economic development. Source Calculated and drawn up by the authors

186

A. S. Abdulkadyrov et al.

4 Conclusion Therefore, it is justified that international migration in the modern world economy as a whole contributes to the sustainable development of national economic systems. It improves the global competitiveness of the economy, accelerates economic growth and increases GDP per capita, but hinders the achievement of sustainable development goals (social development and environmental protection). The results of modeling and optimization showed that the optimal migration flow in the world economy on average is 321.2 people. per 1 thousand people. of the population. In order to achieve it, recommendations are proposed for the management of human capital, which involves human development in all available directions. Nevertheless, given the negative consequences associated with impeding the realization of sustainable development goals, the feasibility of optimization is doubtful and justified only when these goals are sidelined in the sustainability of the development of economic systems.

References Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A Model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):589–595 Alekseev AN, Evdokimov SY, Tarasova AY, Khachaturyan KS, Khachaturyan AA (2018) Financial strategy of development of industry 4.0 in the countries with developing economy. Espacios 39(12):1–12 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Chernova VY, Starostin VS, Degtereva (2019) Study of sector-specific innovation efforts: the case from Russian economy. Entrep Sustain Iss VSI Entrep Sustain Center 7(1):540– 552 Borzenko KV (2018) Konkurentnaya sreda osnova aktivizacii marketinga organizacii zdravoohraneniya v sovremennoi Rossii [Competitive environment as a basis for intensifying the marketing of healthcare organizations in modern Russia]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XX All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “Marketing and pr: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35-2018-xx/581-konkurentnaya-sredakak-osnova-aktivizatsii-marketinga-organizatsij-zdravookhraneniya-v-sovremennoj-rossii. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Iss 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L (2019) Project Finance for Africa’s construction sector: can stabilization funds work? In: Popkova E (eds) The future of the global financial system: downfall or harmony. ISC 2018. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 57. Springer, Cham. Online ISBN 978-3-030-00102-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00102-5_4 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing

Human Capital Management as a Basis for Global Mobility …

187

Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set. Data accessed 11 May 2020 Khachaturian AA, Ponomareva SV, Melnikova AS (2020) The platform of information and economic security of the Russian Industrial Enterprises. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):123–129 Morozova IA, Popkova EG, Litvinova TN (2019) Sustainable development of global entrepreneurship: infrastructure and perspectives. Int Entrep Manage J 15(2):589–597 Nikiforova ME, Yashchenko SO (2018) Raschet energeticheskoi effektivnosti ispolzovaniya solnechnikh batarei v stroitelnom komplekse g. Volgograda. [Calculation of energy efficiency of using solar panels in the construction complex of Volgograd]. In Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XIX All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “Theoretical and methodological foundations for the development of the construction complex”. http://archilab.online/konfer entsii-2018-goda/34-2018-xix/580-raschet-energeticheskoj-effektivnosti-ispolzovaniya-solnec hnykh-batarej-v-stroitelnom-komplekse-g-volgograda. Data accessed: 05 June 2020 Petrenko E, Stolyarov N (2019) Features of the management of international projects, taking into account intercultural differences of the partners. Entrep Sustain Iss 6(4):2037–2051. https://doi. org/10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(34) Popkova EG (2017) Economic and legal foundations of modern Russian Society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human capital and AI in Industry 4.0. convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. J Intell Capital (in press, 2020) Popkova EG, Zmiyak KV (2019) Priorities of training of digital personnel for industry 4.0: social competencies vs technical competencies. On the Horizon 27(3–4):138–144 Popkova EG, Poluyufta L, Beshanova Y, Popova LV, Kolesnikova E (2017) Innovations as a basis for marketing strategies of Russian oil companies in the conditions of oil prices reduction. Contrib Econ 9783319606958:449–455 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pozdnyakova UA, Popkova EG, Kuzlaeva IM, Lisova OM, Saveleva NA (2017) Strategic management of clustering policy during provision of sustainable development. Contrib Econ 9783319454610:413–421 Pritvorova T, Tasbulatova B, Petrenko E (2018) Possibilities of blitz-psychograms as a tool for human resource management in the supporting system of hardiness of company. Entrep Sustain Iss 6(2):840–853. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.2(25) Purtiev MN, Morozova IA (2018) Konkurentosposobnosti proizvoditelei lekarstvennikh sredstv s tochki zreniya konzepcii innovacionnoi kulturi [Competitiveness of drug manufacturers in terms of innovative culture]. In: Popkova EG (eds) INSSCCOM18. XX All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “Marketing and PR: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab. online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35-2018-xx/582-konkurentosposobnost-proizvoditelej-lekarstve nnykh-sredstv-s-tochki-zreniya-kontseptsii-innovatsionnoj-kultury. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Sergi BS (ed) (2018) Exploring the future of Russia’s economy and markets: towards sustainable economic development. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Bogoviz AV, Litvinova TN (2019) Understanding Industry 4.0: AI, the internet of things, and the future of work. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK

188

A. S. Abdulkadyrov et al.

Tripathi D, Priyadarshi P, Kumar P, Kumar S (2020) Micro-foundations for sustainable development: leadership and employee performance. Int J Organ Anal 28(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJOA-01-2019-1622 UNDP (2020) Human Development Report 2019. http://www.hdr.undp.org/. Data accessed: 11 May 2020 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia and the Caucasus 19(2):56–63 Zhang D, Wang C, Zheng D, Yu X (2018) Process of innovation knowledge increase in supply chain network from the perspective of sustainable development. Indus Manage Data Syst 118(4):873– 888. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-06-2017-0243

Human Resources Priorities for the Digital Economy for Sustainable Development Olga V. Budzinskaya and Nargiz F. Teregulova

Abstract Purpose The purpose of the work is to identify and justify priorities for the staffing of the digital economy for sustainable development. Design/Methodology/Approach The authors use the correlation analysis method. Countries with different values of the knowledge sub-index (“knowledge”) in the digital competitiveness index in 2020 were selected as the subjects of the research to ensure representativeness of data. Based on the indicators included in the knowledge sub-index (“knowledge”) in the digital competitiveness index, the areas of personnel support for the digital economy are identified. Findings The authors calculated equations of paired linear regression, showing that in general, the staffing of the digital economy makes a significant positive contribution to sustainable development. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the conformity of the directions of personnel support of the digital economy to the interests of sustainable development was carried out. Originality/Value It is justified that the priority areas of personnel support for the digital economy in the interests of sustainable development are the trans-nationalization of the “knowledge economy” (correlation of place in the digitalization and sustainability rating: −46.09%), the development of digital competencies (−41.58%), an increase in the level of education in society (−25.11%) and the provision of the economy with scientific personnel (−24.47%). In these areas, it is recommended to focus the efforts of the state regulation of the personnel supply of the digital economy for sustainable development. Keywords Priority areas · Human resources · Digital economy · Sustainable development JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58 O. V. Budzinskaya (B) · N. F. Teregulova Gubkin Russian State University (NIU) of Oil and Gas, Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected] N. F. Teregulova e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_19

189

190

O. V. Budzinskaya and N. F. Teregulova

1 Introduction The new (“broad”) interpretation of sustainability used in this book suggests a positive contribution of scientific and technological progress to the sustainable development of the economy. The spread of advanced technologies due to digitalization allows not only to strengthen environmental protection based on increased control of economic activities and the development of “green” digital technologies and to improve the satisfaction of social needs based on increased accessibility and quality of goods (implementation of sustainable development goals), but also allows to create new— high-tech vectors of economic growth and increase the global competitiveness of the economy based on its progressiveness. At the same time, the social environment in which the digital economy is developing and which is determined by two parameters deserves special attention. The first parameter: the level of social and environmental responsibility of society, its progressiveness and susceptibility to innovation and high technologies. This parameter determines the fundamental possibility of using digitalization in the interests of sustainable economic development. Despite the unconditional importance of this parameter, it is determined by socio-cultural factors, which is why it lends itself poorly to public administration, which causes its low attractiveness for practical-oriented scientific research in the field of normative economic science. The second parameter: staffing of the digital economy, reflecting the level of development of human capital and the system of science and education. This parameter lends itself largely to government regulation and is therefore of the highest interest in the context of the problem. Therefore, this study is focused on its study. The purpose of this work is to identify and justify priorities for the human resources of the digital economy for sustainable development.

2 Materials and Method Issues of personnel support for the digital economy are discussed in the works of Goyal and Sergi (2015), Popkova (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2020), Popkova and Gulzat (2020a, b), Popkova and Zmiyak (2019), Sergi et al. (2019), Zavyalova et al. (2018). The importance and potential contribution of the digital economy to the promotion of sustainable development is disclosed in Abdelhalim and Eldin (2019), Andronova et al. (2019), Avery (2018), Haabazoka et al. (2020), Lawanda (2019), Popkova et al. (2019), Popkova and Parakhina (2019), Popkova and Sergi (2019), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2003, 2019), Shulus et al. (2020), Tripathi et al. (2020), Borzenko (2018), Purtiev and Morozova (2018), Kochanov and Natsubidze (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturyan et al. (2017), Ogurtsov et al. (2016), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020).

Human Resources Priorities for the Digital Economy … 100.000 90.000 80.000 70.000 60.000 50.000 40.000 30.000 20.000 10.000 0.000

90.998

90.850

191

90.503 72.856 58.451

54.978

49.166

49.069

41.722

United Switzerland Singapore China (26th Russia (43rd India (49th Brazil (57th Peru (58th Mongolia States (1st (2nd place) (3rd place) place) place) place) place) place) (63rd place) place)

Top-3

Middle-3

Low-3

Fig. 1 Sample of countries to conduct the study and their classification by the value of the subknowledge index (“knowledge”) in the digital rentability index in 2020, points 1–100 (place in the global ranking 1–63). Source compiled by authors based on IMD Materials (2020)

At the same time, the priority areas of personnel support for the digital economy in the interests of sustainable development are not defined and need scientific study. To do this, this work uses the correlation analysis method. Countries with different knowledge sub-index values (“knowledge”) within the Digital Competitiveness Index in 2020 were selected as research targets for data representativeness (Fig. 1). Based on the data of Fig. 1 and Table 1, we calculated the equations of paired linear regression. According to the equations obtained, with an increase in the digital competitiveness index by 1 point, the global competitiveness index increases by 0.5811 points (correlation 97.95%), the economic growth rate decreases by 0.0659% (correlation 24.70%, weak connection), GDP per capita—increases by $1,344.9 (correlation 80.74%) and the index of sustainable development of the score—increases by 0.1645 points (correlation 40.46%). Therefore, in general, the human resources of the digital economy make a significant positive contribution to sustainable development, the statistics of which are shown in Table 1. Based on the indicators included in the knowledge sub-index (“knowledge”) within the digital competitiveness index, the following areas of personnel support for the digital economy are identified in this work: • Raising the level of education in society—indicators of the implementation of this direction are the general level of education, general training of personnel and the development of higher education;

192

O. V. Budzinskaya and N. F. Teregulova

Table 1 Sustainable development statistics in the chosen countries 2020 Country

Global competitiveness index, points 1–100

Economic growth rate, %

GDP per capita, dollars

Sustainable development index, points 1–100

USA

83.7

2.121

64,212.535

74.5

Switzerland

82.3

1.600

79,855.924

78.8

Singapore

84.8

2.553

53,557.605

69.6

China

73.9

6.000

9,850.988

73.2

Russia

66.7

1.500

11,558.835

70.9

India

61.4

7.791

2,173.500

61.1

Brazil

60.9

1.954

11,110.946

70.6

Peru

61.7

3.838

7,141.429

71.2

Mongolia

52.6

8.073

3,645.575

64.7

Source Compiled by the authors based on the materials of the Institute of Scientific Communications (2020)

• Trans-nationalization of the “knowledge economy”—indicators of the implementation of this area are the international exchange of experience and the involvement of foreign highly qualified specialists; • Development of digital competencies (an independent indicator that embodies this direction); • Providing the economy with scientific personnel—indicators of the implementation of this direction are the training of scientific personnel and an increase in the number of scientific personnel (at enterprises and research institutes); • Ensuring gender equality in the education and labour market—the indicators of implementation are the training of women scientists and the involvement of women in research; • Robotization (combines automation, digitalization and modernization) of science and education (an independent indicator that embodies this direction). The data in these directions are shown in Table 2.3.

3 Results The results of the correlation analysis based on Tables 1, 2 and 3 are shown in Fig. 2. Figure 2 shows that the relationship of each of the studied indicators of the staffing of the digital economy with indicators of sustainable development is inconsistent, which does not allow for detailed analysis. Although even a general view of the correlation results suggests that most correlation coefficients are negative. Consequently, as the country’s position in the ranking improves, its stability increases. For more accurate estimates, refer to the generalized results (Table 4).

Human Resources Priorities for the Digital Economy …

193

Table 2 Statistics on the staffing of the digital economy in the direction of improving the level of education in society and the trans-nationalization of the “knowledge economy”, places 1–63 Country

Educational assessment PISA–Math

Employee training

USA

Higher education achievement

International experience

Foreign highly-skilled personnel

37

38

19

29

7

Switzerland

7

5

16

2

1

Singapore

1

28

2

9

2

China

5

13

25

45

27

Russia

21

45

9

59

54

India

n/a

39

59

34

40

Brazil

56

53

57

58

58

Peru

53

61

7

44

26

Mongolia

n/a

24

44

61

56

Source Compiled by authors based on IMD Materials (2020)

Table 3 Statistics on the human resources of the digital economy in the direction of developing digital competencies, providing the economy with scientific personnel, gender equality and robotization, places 1–63 Country

USA

Digital/technological Graduates Total Women Female Robots in skills in R&D with researchers education sciences personnel degrees and R&D per capita 9

54

n/a

11

n/a

3

Switzerland 17

26

3

29

35

15

8

2

13

n/a

42

32

China

15

n/a

35

n/a

n/a

1

Russia

42

7

23

3

21

8

India

22

4

55

n/a

n/a

17

Brazil

62

56

44

51

51

14

Peru

59

30

58

37

39

43

Mongolia

56

48

60

32

9

n/a

Singapore

Source Compiled by authors based on IMD Materials (2020)

Table 4 shows that the priority areas of the digital economy for sustainable development are as follows: • trans-nationalization of the “knowledge-based economy” (correlation of place in the digitalization and sustainability rating: −46.09%), in the framework of which it is necessary to attract foreign highly qualified specialists (−48.48%) and international exchange of experience (−43.70%); • development of digital competencies (−41.58%);

194

O. V. Budzinskaya and N. F. Teregulova 100.00 50.00 0.00 -50.00 -100.00 -150.00

correlation with competitiveness

correlation with economic growth

correlation with GDP per capita

correlation with sustainable development index

Fig. 2 Correlation of indicators of human resources support of digital economy with indicators of sustainable development, %. Source Calculated and built by the authors Table 4 Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the conformity of the areas of personnel support of the digital economy to the interests of sustainable development Direction

Indicator of direction implementation

Average correlation Implementing the with resistance, % direction for sustainable development

Raising the level of education in society

General level of education

−12.02

General training

−35.09

Development of higher education

−28.21

International exchange of experience

−43.70

Attracting foreign highly qualified specialists

−48.48

Trans-nationalization of the «knowledge-based economy»

Development of digital competencies Providing the economy with scientific personnel

Gender equality in the education and labour markets

Robotization of science and education Source Calculated and compiled by the authors

−46.09

Key area, needs to be prioritized

Focus area −24.47

Focus area

−1.8

Area is not a priority

−45.55

Training of women −13.04 scientists Involving women in research

Focus area

−41.58

Training of −3.40 scientific personnel Increase in the number of scientific staff

−25.11

9.44 −4.02

Area is not a priority

Human Resources Priorities for the Digital Economy …

195

• Raising the level of education in society (−25.11%), which requires general training of personnel (−35.09%), development of higher education (−28.21%) and improvement of the general level of education (−12.02%); • providing the economy with scientific personnel (−24.47%), within the framework of which it is necessary to increase the number of scientific personnel (−45.55%) and train scientific personnel (−3.40%).

4 Conclusion As a result of quantitative and qualitative analysis of the correspondence of the areas of personnel support of the digital economy to the interests of sustainable development, it was established that the priority areas of personnel support of the digital economy in the interests of sustainable development are the trans-nationalization of the “knowledge economy,” the development of digital competencies, raising the level of education in society and providing the economy with scientific personnel. In these areas, it is recommended to focus the efforts of the government to regulate the staffing of the digital economy for sustainable development.

References Abdelhalim K, Eldin A (2019) Can CSR help achieve sustainable development? Applying a new assessment model to CSR cases from Egypt. Int J Sociol Soc Policy 39(9/10):773–795. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-06-2019-0120 Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Kovnerev MA (2020) A model for achieving comprehensive efficiency of the energy projects implementation in the sustainable development framework. Indus Compet Digit Manage Integr 1(1):589–595 Alpidovskaya ML, Popkova EG (2019) Marx and modernity: a political and economic analysis of social systems management. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Andronova IV, Gusakov N, Ganeeva M, Dyuzheva N (2019) Common industrial policy as a factor of the development of integration processes in the EAEU. Econ Policy Emerg Econ 12(4) Avery G (2018) Blueprint for implementing the UN’s sustainable development goals. Strat Leadersh 46(5):52–53. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-09-2018-148 Borzenko KV (2018) Logika upravleniya processom gosudarstvenno-chastnogo partnerstva v zdravoohranenii [The logic of managing public-private partnership in health care]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XX All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “Marketing and PR: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35-2018xx/583-logika-upravleniya-protsessom-gosudarstvenno-chastnogo-partnerstva-v-zdravookhran enii. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Goyal S, Sergi BS (2015) Social entrepreneurship and sustainability—understanding the context and key characteristics. J Secur Sustain Iss 4(3):269–278 Haabazoka L, Tendedziso L, Mwanaumo E, Musonda N, Mambwe M (2020) Determinants of the petroleum fuel supply chain performance in Zimbabwe: a case of the national oil infrastructure company. In: Aigbavboa C, Thwala W (eds) The construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. CIDB 2019. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26528-1_58

196

O. V. Budzinskaya and N. F. Teregulova

IMD (2020) World digital competitiveness ranking 2019. https://www.imd.org/wcc/world-compet itiveness-center-rankings/world-digital-competitiveness-rankings-2019/. Data accessed: 11 May 2020 Inshakova AO, Bogoviz AV (eds) (2020) Alternative methods of judging economic conflicts in the national positive and soft law. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Institute of Scientific Communications (2020) Data set “Big data of the modern world economy: digital platform for intelligent analytics—2020”. https://www.archilab.online/en/data/sountingdata-set. Data accessed: 11 May 2020 Khachaturyan AA, Abdulkadyrov AS, Zhigulina EP, Sirotkina NV (2017) The issues of improving the investment climate and investment attractiveness of Russian industries in the mediumterm perspective. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil’noi Promyshlennosti 5(371):40–43 Kochanov OA, Natsubidze AS (2018) Aktualnie problemi upravleniya chelovechiskimi resursami v deyatelnosti rossiskikh predpriyatii i puti ikh resheniya [Topical problems of human resources management in the activities of Russian enterprises and ways to solve them]. In: Popkova EG (ed) INSSCCOM18. XXII All-Russian electronic seminar—conference “Modern sociocultural and legal foundations of the Russian Society”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/372018-xxii/542-aktualnye-problemy-upravleniya-chelovecheskimi-resursami-v-deyatelnosti-ros sijskikh-predpriyatij-i-puti-ikh-resheniya. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Lawanda I (2019) The importance of information access of cultural values to the principles of sustainable development in climate change. Glob Knowl Mem Commun 69(1/2):9–19. https:// doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-03-2019-0044 Ogurtsov ES, Rylov AA, Durdyeva DA, Lebedev NA, Khachaturyan KS, Safyan AM, Rochev KV, Tsareva GR (2016) The role of business incubators in supporting economic growth and advancement of small business of the Russian Federation. Indian J Sci Technol 9(29):89–99 Popkova EG (2017) Economic and Legal Foundations of Modern Russian Society. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian business and management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Popkova EG (2019) Preconditions of formation and development of industry 4.0 in the conditions of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169(1):65–72 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020a) Technological revolution in the 21st century: digital society vs. artificial intelligence. Lect Notes Netw Syst 91:339–345 Popkova EG, Gulzat K (2020b) Contradiction of the digital economy: public well-being vs. cyber threats. Lect Notes Netw Syst 87:112–124 Popkova EG, Parakhina VN (2019) Managing the global financial system on the basis of artificial intelligence: possibilities and limitations. Lect Notes Netw Syst 57:939–946 Popkova EG, Sergi BS (eds) (2019) Digital economy: complexity and variety vs. rationality. Springer International Publishing, Berlin Popkova EG, Sergi BS (2020) Human capital and AI in Industry 4.0. convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. Journal of Intellectual Capital (In Press, 2020) Popkova EG, Zmiyak KV (2019) Priorities of training of digital personnel for industry 4.0: social competencies vs technical competencies. On the Horizon 27(3–4):38–144 Popkova EG, Egorova EN, Popova E, Pozdnyakova UA (2019) The model of state management of economy on the basis of the internet of things. Stud Comput Intell 826:1137–1144 Popkova EG, Przhedetsky YV, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (eds) (2020) Marketing of healthcare organizations: technologies of public-private partnership. In: A volume in the series Popkova EG (ed) Advances in research on Russian Business and Management, Charlotte, NC, USA. Information Age Publishing Pritvorova T, Tasbulatova B, Petrenko E (2018) Possibilities of blitz-psychograms as a tool for human resource management in the supporting system of hardiness of company. Entrep Sustain Iss 6(2):840–853. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2018.6.2(25)

Human Resources Priorities for the Digital Economy …

197

Purtiev MN, Morozova IA (2018) Sistema upravleniya predprinimatelskimi strukturami: suschnost, soderzhanie i effektivnost. [Business structure management system: essence, content and efficiency]. In: Popkova EG (ed). INSSCCOM18. XX AllRussian electronic seminar—conference “Marketing and PR: new tools and practical solutions”. http://archilab.online/konferentsii-2018-goda/35-2018-xx/584-sistema-upravleniyapredprinimatelskimi-strukturami-sushchnost-soderzhanie-i-effektivnost. Data accessed: 5 June 2020 Ragulina YV (2019) Priorities of development of industry 4.0 in modern economic systems with different progress in formation of knowledge economy. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:167–174 Ragulina YV, Alekseev AN, Strizhkina IV, Tumanov AI (2019) Methodology of criterial evaluation of consequences of the industrial revolution of the 21st century. Stud Syst Decis Control 169:235– 244 Sergi BS (2003) Economic dynamics in transitional economies: the four-P Governments, the EU enlargement, and the bruxelles consensus. Routledge, New York Sergi BS (ed) (2019) Tech, smart cities, and regional development in contemporary Russia. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Sergi BS, Popkova EG, Bogoviz AV, Litvinova TN (2019) Understanding Industry 4.0: AI, the internet of things, and the future of work. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK Shulus AA, Akopova ES, Przhedetskaya NV, Borzenko KV (2020) Intellectual production and consumption: a new reality of the 21st century. Lect Notes Netw Syst 92:353–359 Tripathi D, Priyadarshi P, Kumar P, Kumar S (2020) Micro-foundations for sustainable development: leadership and employee performance. Int J Organ Anal 28(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJOA-01-2019-1622 Zavyalova EB, Studenikin NV, Starikova EA (2018) Business participation in implementation of socially oriented sustainable development goals in countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus region. Central Asia and the Caucasus 19(2):56–63

Specifics of Sustainable Development of Different Types of Socioeconomic Systems in Modern Conditions

Sustainable Development of the Region and the Crisis Phenomenon of Regional Economic Sustainability Sergey V. Dokholyan , Liana E. Kabisova-Komaeva , and Kometa T. Paytaeva

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this work is to develop a methodology for assessing the sustainability of the development of the region in accordance with its new scientific vision as a systemic reflection of its own dynamics (development cycles) and its situation in the national economy. Design/Methodology/Approach Author’s new methodology for assessing the sustainability of the development of the region’s economy has been developed, the central element of which is the matrix of sustainability of the development of the region’s economy. The qualitative interpretation of the sustainability of the region’s economy depends on the combination of quantitative estimates of the indicator under consideration: on the ratio of the indicator in the region to the national average and on the ratio of the indicator in the region in the current period to its value in the previous period. According to the developed methodology, the assessment is carried out first separately for each sustainability indicator in order to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the sustainable development of the region, and then by the average arithmetic of all indicators in order to assess sustainability as a whole, as well as to carry out interregional comparisons. Findings The methodology for assessing the sustainability of the development of the region’s economy was tested on the example of the top 3 regions of the North Caucasus Federal District of Russia. The evaluation results showed that in the Republic of Dagestan and the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic there is an external-oriented development, and in the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania—a crisis of sustainability. Originality/Value The developed author’s methodology for assessing the stability of the region’s economy allows us to systematically assess the dynamics of its development and its relationship with the national economy, thereby S. V. Dokholyan (B) Dagestan Federal Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Makhachkala, Russia e-mail: [email protected] L. E. Kabisova-Komaeva Vladikavkaz Institute of Management, Vladikavkaz, Russia e-mail: [email protected] K. T. Paytaeva Chechen State University, Grozny, Russia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. V. Ragulina et al. (eds.), Sustainable Development of Modern Digital Economy, Research for Development, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70194-9_20

201

202

S. V. Dokholyan et al.

fully, accurately and reliably characterizing both the statistics and the dynamics of its development. The uniqueness and advantage of the methodology is that it reveals the phenomenon of the crisis state of regional economic stability (shown in the example of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania of Russia), indicating that the region is showing negative dynamics both compared to the previous period and compared to the national economy (absolutely negative dynamics) and needs to change the model of sustainable development. Keywords Sustainable development · Region · Phenomenon of crisis state of stability · Regional economy · Regions of russia JEL Codes C31 · C33 · C38 · F63 · Q01 · Q56 · O11 · O12 · O31 · O32 · O33 · O38 · P25 · P48 · R11 · R13 · R58

1 Introduction The sustainable development of the region is a special aspect of the problem of sustainability, since the region is simultaneously a separate, independent economic system, and is part of the national economy and therefore inseparable from it. Therefore, the specificity of determining the sustainability of the region’s economy is the need to take into account not only its own development dynamics, but also its relationship of the region with the national economy. This causes an increased difficulty in developing scientific and methodological support for assessing the sustainability of the development of the region’s economy. The existing methods allow only fragmentary reflection of these mandatory aspects of the region’s sustainability, limited either to the scaling of the regional economy (static assessment of the region as an isolated economic system), or analysis of the change in the region’s development indicators over time (dynamic assessment of the region as an isolated economic system), or comparison of the socio-economic situation of the region with national development indicators (assessment of the region in relation to the national economy). In this book, we adhere to the classification of sustainability by levels of economic systems and therefore fundamentally distinguish the stability of the national and regional economies, using different indicators to evaluate them. Therefore, when assessing the sustainability of the development of the region’s economy, we do not set the goal of determining how stable it is as a static isolated economic system, since we conduct such an assessment at the level of the national economy, and there is no point in its duplication at the regional level. In accordance with existing methods, it is assumed that if the national economy develops unsustainably, then its constituent regions are obviously unstable. In this book, we hold the opposite position, according to which the sustainability of the national economy is determined from the point of view of compliance with the established criteria (as well as in existing methods), but the sustainability of the

Sustainable Development of the Region and the Crisis …

203

region is studied from the point of view of its own dynamics (development cycles) and its position in the national economy. The purpose of this work is to develop a methodology for assessing the sustainability of the development of the region in accordance with its new scientific vision as a systemic reflection of its own dynamics (development cycles) and its situation in the national economy.

2 Materials and Method Existing methods for measuring and analyzing the sustainability of the region’s economy are described in numerous published works, including Andronova et al. (2019), Avery (2018), Chalhoub (2018), Frolov et al. (2017), Goyal and Sergi (2015), Haabazoka (2019), Inshakov et al. (2019), Lawanda (2019), Morozova et al. (2019), Petrenko et al. (2018), Popkova et al. (2014, 2016, 2017), Pozdnyakova et al. (2017), Ragulina (2019), Ragulina et al. (2019), Sergi (2003, 2019), Sergi et al. (2019), Sergi (2018), Tripathi et al. (2020), Zavyalova et al. (2018), Borzenko (2018), Purtiev and Morozova (2018), Kochanov and Natsubidze (2018), Alpidovskaya and Popkova (2019), Abdulkadyrov et al. (2020), Inshakova and Bogoviz (2020), Khachaturyan et al. (2017), Ogurtsov et al. (2016), Popkova (2017), Popkova et al. (2020). These publications formed the theoretical and methodological basis of the research, on the basis of which in this chapter we developed a new, author’s methodology for assessing the sustainability of the development of the region’s economy. The central element of our methodology is the sustainability matrix of the region’s economy presented in Table 1. As it can be seen from Table 1 in the developed matrix, the qualitative interpretation of the stability of the region’s economy depends on a combination of quantitative estimates of the indicator under consideration: on the ratio of the indicator Table 1 Regional economic sustainability matrix Ratio of the indicator in Ratio of indicator in the region in period t1 to its value in the period the region to the national t0b averagea >1 =1 1

Progress in sustainability

External-oriented development of the region

=1

Internally oriented development of the Region

Stability of the region’s economy

Pre-crisis state

Pre-crisis state

Crisis of resilience