Impact Assessment of the Regional Regulation Methods on the Investment Activity
Abstract
The reason for studying methods of increasing investment activity lies in the insufcient effectiveness of current market mechanisms responsible for attracting investments into regions. The state and regions (constituent entities) take on regulatory function provided by the federal and regional legislation. Here arises the need to study processes regulating investments and monitoring the regulatory impact. It is important to assess the use of statistical methods not only for individual episodes, but also for mass phenomena. In this article on the basis of dynamic model of panel regression of investments the author tested the impact of the 35 forms of support on investments into regions of the Russian Federation. The results of econometric studies allowed to identify the incentives and methods of stimulation most effective for the development of investment activity, and thus determine the directions for improving regional legislation. Of all types of investment support the most positive effect on the regions has the effective marketing. Second most effective group of measures is associated with preparation of production conditions and factors of production, such as: training and retraining of personnel, grants for building of the infrastructure. The next group of methods consists of fnancial and economic support: budget loans and concessional loans; tax exemptions (including grants-in-aid); budget investments, investment tax credits.
About the Author
Valentina F. Lapo
Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Department of Management, Siberian Federal University. 79, Svobodny Pr., Krasnoyarsk, 660041, Russia.
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Department of Management, Siberian Federal University. 79, Svobodny Pr., Krasnoyarsk, 660041, Russia.
References
1. Suslov V.I., Bobylev G.V., Valieva O.V., et al. Determining Ways to Improve Regional Innovation Policy. Region: Economics and Sociology. 2015;(1):117-196. (In Russ.)
2. Lapo V.F. Efciency of Investment Stimulation Methods in a Timber Industry Complex: An Econometric Research. Applied Econometrics. 2014;33(1):30-50. (In Russ.)
3. Kiseleva O.V. The Instruments of Investment Activity Stimulation on the Example of the Regions of Privolzhsky Federal District. Russian Journal of Entrepreneurship. 2013;(15):23-31. (In Russ.)
4. Antipina N.I. Organizational-Economic Maintenance of Innovation Activity in the Region: Comparative Assessment. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast. 2014;2(32):186-197. (In Russ.)
5. Khavanova I.A. Tax Incentives for Investment in Energy Saving. Economics, Taxes & Law. 2013;(3):89-93. (In Russ.)
6. Sayfeva S.N. A Comparative Analysis of Practice to Stimulate Private Investment in the Mirror of the Scientifc Literature. Financial Journal. 2013;4(18):149-156. (In Russ.)
7. Malis N.I. Tax Policy for the Medium-Term Period: Benefts Optimization and Investments Stimulation. Financial Journal. 2014;3(21):89-95. (In Russ.)
8. Grigor O.G. The Instruments of the State Investment Promotion Policy in the Russian Federation. Vestnik KRSU. 2014;14(3):134-137. (In Russ.)
9. La Porta R., Lopez-de-Silanes F., Shleifer A., Vishny R.W. Law and Finance. Journal of Political Economy. 1998;(6):1113-1155.
10. Djankov S., Glaeser E., Porta R. La, et al. The New Comparative Economics. Journal of Comparative Economics. 2003;(31):595-619.
11. Menard C., Marais B. Can We Rank Legal Systems According to Their Economic Efciency? Washington University Journal of Low and Policy. 2008;(5):55-80.
12. Frank R.H. Why Is Cost-Beneft Analysis So Controversial? In: Cost-Beneft Analysis: Legal, Economic, and Philosophical Perspectives. Chicago; 2001. P. 77-94.
13. Aldashev G. Legal Institutions, Political Economy, and Development. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 2009;(2):257-270.
14. Efciency of the Legislation in Economic Sphere. Moscow: Wolters Kluwer; 2010. 384 p. (In Russ.)
15. Lapo V.F. The Approach to the Estimation оf Changes in Systems of Regional Support of Investment Activity. Spatial Economics. 2017;(2):68-94. (In Russ.)
16. Krugman P. Increasing Returns and Economic Geography. Journal of Political Economy. 1991;(3):483-499.
17. Martin P., Rodgers C. A. Industrial Location and Public Infrastructure. Journal of International Economics. 1995;(39):335-351.
18. Baldwin R., Forslid R., Martin P., et al. Economic Geography and Public Policy. Princeton University Press; 2003.
19. Krugman P. History versus Expectations. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1991;(2):651-667.
20. Lapo V. Spatial Concentration of Production and Investor Expectations: The Analysis of Branch Attraction of Investments into Regions. Applied Econometrics. 2010;18(2):3-19. (In Russ.)
21. Baltagi B.H. Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2003.
22. Greene W.H. Econometric Analysis. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company; 1997.
23. Verbeek M.A Guide to Modern Econometrics. John Wiley & Sons; 2000.
24. Aivazian S.A., Mchitarian V.S. Applied Statistics and Foundation of Econometrics. Textbook for University. Moscow: UNITI Publ.; 1998. 738 p. (In Russ.)
25. Belyaev V.I. Region Marketing: Local Markets and Expanded Reproduction in Regions. Izvestiya of Altai State University. 2013;2-1(78):284-288. (In Russ.)
26. Morozova G.A. Marketing in Management of Industrial Region. Dr. Econ. Sci. Diss.; Nizhny Novgorod, 1997. (In Russ.)
27. The Role and Importance of Marketing in Solving Socio-Economic Problems of Region (Experience of Regions of Russia). In: Serbulov A.V., Matveeva E.A. (eds.) Collection of Sci. Papers of All-Russian conference. Kaliningrad: 2006. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Lapo V.F. Impact Assessment of the Regional Regulation Methods on the Investment Activity. Voprosy statistiki. 2018;25(9):48-62. (In Russ.)
Views:
466
Email this article 