Quality and Factors of Economic Development: Matters of Evaluation and Analysis

With the exhaustion of the extensive factors of economic growth and the shift of development goals towards the quality of life, the quality of growth becomes the main condition for the further development of the country’s economy and social progress. This article addresses the multifaceted concept of the quality of economic growth and its content not only on the part of growth characteristics as dynamism, stability, consistency, efficiency, and progressiveness but also results of social development and inclusiveness of growth, as well as their determining factors. The interconnection, mutual support, and competitiveness of selected components of growth and its factors, including dynamism and growth inclusiveness are reviewed. The authors focus on the importance of understanding inclusiveness as creating equal, non-discriminatory conditions for the development of all population groups and economic entities, and not just the even distribution of development results. It is noted that the quality of growth is relevant as a link between current growth and sustainable development in the long term. It is essential to consider the quality of growth not only as a result of development but as a factor and condition for further progress, which is not yet fully reflected in the modern systems of development indices used by international organizations. A system of indicators of the quality of economic development should be developed according to the expansion of the concept of quality of growth. Using the advancement of the theory of endogenous growth makes it possible to assess the role of individual factors in economic growth. Along with fixed asset investments, the leading role in modern conditions is taken on by the quality of human capital, in the formation of which participate education, healthcare, science, and culture, while education, taking into account its vital role in the emergence of a new (VI) technological paradigm, deals with raising and nurturing the creative generation of young people who will shape the new order. The contribution of these industries to the long-term growth of the economy significantly exceeds their development costs. Considerable attention is paid to the study of factors determining the quality of education in general, especially at the regional level. It is noted that amidst the development of modern technologies responsible for the transfer of data and knowledge, as well as standardization and regulation of the processes of providing services, it is necessary to maintain the content of education services, their focus on the shaping of a creative personality and transferring creative work skills. Only this will ensure the country’s participation and its benefits in the creation of a new technological structure.

The article examines factors that most affect the level and quality of education, and touch upon differentiation of regions according to these indicators. Among them: the state of the material and technical base, personnel availability and qualifications, terms for the provision of services, and others. The authors delve into the influence of region resource provision factors, remoteness from labour force centers of gravity and emerging research centers, as well as national particularities and historical background of the regions. The data on the “personnel migration” of young people of educational and post-educational age are presented. Relevant conclusions are made about some depletion of this resource in several remote regions. The efforts of the regions and the redistribution of funds through the federal budget, as well as business eff orts, are not enough to reduce the regional differentiation in education quality. This requires tailored solutions allowing to use the potential of young people from remote regions and regions not affected by scientific centralization, as an important human development factor. The paper considers directions for solving this problem.

1. Sustainable Development Goals, UN. (In Russ.) Available from: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/ru/sustainable-development-goals/.

2. The Inclusive Growth and Development Report 2018. Available from: http//reports.weforum.org/inclusivegrowth-and-development-report-2018/.

3. Anand R., Mishra M., Peiris S. Inclusive Growth: Measurement and Determinants? IMF Working Paper. 2013.

4. Murtin F., Schreyer P. Inclusive Growth: OECD Measurement Framework. OECD Statistics Working Papers. 2015.

5. Kuranov G.O. Measuring the Quality of Economic Growth. Voprosy Statistiki. 2019;26(7):5-19. (In Russ.)

6. System of Indicators for Assessing the Quality of Economic Growth. Scientific Report of the RFTA. Moscow: 2019. (In Russ.)

7. Klepach A., Kuranov G. Cyclical Waves in the Economic Development of the U.S. and Russia (Issues of Methodology and Analysis). Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2013;(11):4-33. (In Russ.)

8. Kuranov G.O. On Research of Economic Dynamics for Forecasting Purposes. Voprosy Statistiki. 2014;(6):8-19. (In Russ.)

9. Barinova V.A., Zemtsov S.P. Inclusive Growth and Regional Resilience in Russia. Region: Economics and Sociology. 2019;1(101):23-46. (In Russ.)

10. Sevastianova A. Ie., Tokarev A. N., Shmat V. V. Application Features of Inclusive Development Concept in Resource Regions. 2017;1(93):213-236. (In Russ.)

11. Solow R.M. A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1956;70(1):65-94.

12. Koopmans T.C. On the Concept of Optimal Economic Growth. In: Johansen J. (ed.) The Econometric Approach to Development Planning. Amsterdam, North Holland: 1965.

13. Lucas R.E. On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics. 1988;22(1):3-42.

14. Rebelo S. Long-Run Policy Analysis and Long-Run Growth. Journal of Political Economy. 1991;99(3):500-521.

15. Caballe J., Santos M.S. On Endogenous Growth with Physical and Human Capital. Journal of Political Economy. 1993;101(6):1042-1067.

16. Barro R.J., Sala-i-Martin X. Economic Growth. New York: McGraw Hill; 1995.

17. Barro R.J. Determinants of Economic Growth: A CrossCountry Empirical Study. №. w5698 (August). Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research; 1996.

18. Barro R.J., Sala-i-Martin X.Technological Diffusion, Convergence, and Growth. National Bureau of Economic Research. 1995, Working Paper No. 5151.

19. Uzawa H. Optimal Technical Change in an Aggregative Model of Economic Growth. International Economic Review. 1965;6(1);18-31.

20. Lucas R.E. On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics. 1988;22(1):3-42.

21. Romer P.M. Endogenous Technological Change. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper No. 3210. 1989.

22. Nelson R.R., Phelps E.S. Investment in Humans, Technological Diff usion, and Economic Growth. American Economic Review. 1966;56(1/2):69-75.

23. Benhabib J., Spiegel M.M. The Role of Human Capital in Economic Development: Evidence from Aggregate Cross-Country Data. Journal of Monetary Economics. 1994;34(2):143-173.

24. Kuranov G.O., Luk’yanenko R.F. Study of Economic Dynamics and Validation of Growth Factors. Voprosy Statistiki. 2017;1(11):3-20. (In Russ.)

25. Kuranov G.O. Applying Factor and Interindustry Models to Economic Analysis and Forecasting. Voprosy Statistiki. 2018;25(10):7-20. (In Russ.)

26. Analytical Materials Based on the Results of the National Study on the Quality of Mathematical Education in Grades 5-7. Part 1. Federal Service for Supervision in Education and Science. 2014-2015. Available from: https://fioco.ru/Media/Default/Documents/NIKO/5-7_NIKO_MA_part_1.pdf.