Search results

This chapter elaborates on the role of clusters and innovational networks in Russia and interprets that the future growth of Russia’s economy depends on the development of clusters and innovational networks. We substantiated that clusters and innovational networks possess considerable potential in the sphere of provision of sustainable growth of Russia’s economy. Today, this potential is not used due to unequal distribution of clusters and innovational networks on Russia’s vast territory and due to their being at the initial stage of development – despite their prolonged period of existence. However, even in the current conditions, clusters and innovational networks make a significant contribution to Russia’s GDP (15.58% in 2018). By 2024, by implementing our described optimal scenario of clusters and innovational networks development, it would be possible to expand Russia’s GDP by 15 times, which will allow increasing the country’s GDP by 2.5 times. This positive effect will be achieved due to the provision of balance and stability of economic growth, which will make it more sustainable. Clusters and innovational networks should become a basis for sustainable growth of Russia’s economy. We recommend a scenario of sustainable growth based on a more equal distribution of clusters and innovational networks across Russia and a quicker development of clusters and innovational networks via more extensive involvement of private businesses.

Purpose: The purpose of the work is to specify the concept of business system, which allows overcoming the multitude of its treatments and contradiction of scientific research, devoted to its research and allows building the conclusions into the economic theory.

Methodology: A generalized notion of business as a clearly organized corporate economic subject that conducts entrepreneurial activities for the purpose of obtaining income (profit) is offered. For studying it, the methodology of the systemic approach is used.

Conclusions: The specified concept of business system allowed unifying within the common scientific category the existing concepts of economic subject (organizations, companies, corporations, and business structures).

Originality/value: Advantages of the offered concept of business system is systemic character (category “business system” could be used during research in the sphere of management, economics, and law), universal character (the offered concept allowed reflecting internal and external environment of the business system, which allows conducting microeconomic and macroeconomic research on its basis), and clarity (the offered concept reflects the essence of notions of business and illustrated them). The offered conceptual model of modern business system is to be a foundation for theoretical and empirical research, including interdisciplinary.

The purpose of the research is to classify conflicts in socio-economic systems.

It is determined that the existing narrow classifications of conflicts in socio-economic systems within various conceptual approaches partially cross and sometimes contradict each other – so they have to be systematized. For that, the methods of structural and functional analysis and analysis of causal connections are used, with the help of which the author determines criteria of classification of conflicts and their forms for obtaining the most precise system of their classification.

The expanded classification of conflicts in socio-economic systems according to such criteria as form of manifestation of conflict, level of manifestation of conflict, character of causes of emergence of conflict, source of conflict sources, sphere of management of conflict, and expected dominating consequences of conflict is offered. Due to this, it is possible to determine the type of conflict and to select the corresponding managerial measures.

The offered classification possesses the following advantages, as compared to the existing narrow classifications of conflicts in socio-economic systems within conceptual approaches to treatment of the essence of conflict. The first is universal character: the offered classification cannot be used as to all socio-economic systems. Due to this, it will be in demand by systems of various levels – regardless of their specifics. The second is connection to management: the offered classification allows determining the type of conflict and offers recommendations for its management. Due to this, classification of conflicts will be in demand by subjects of conflict management, which will allow increasing effectiveness of this management.

The purpose of the chapter is to develop methodological recommendations and to determine criteria of measuring “conflict character” of socio-economic system.

Due to large diversity of conflicts of socio-economic systems, the authors compile common methodological recommendations for all economic conflicts, but criteria of measuring “conflict character” of socio-economic system by the example of crisis as a manifestation/example of conflict for which statistical and information bases are available and its precise, objective, and authentic evaluation is possible are offered. The methodological tools of this work are based on the method of systematization, the method of classification, the method of comparative analysis, and the method of formalization of authors’ conclusions and recommendations.

Methodological recommendations and criteria for measuring the “conflict character” of socio-economic system are offered – they allow classifying “conflict” systems. As to the value of the index of conflict character, socio-economic systems with reduced conflict level, moderate conflict level, high conflict level, and very high conflict level are distinguished. They differ as to the capability to oppose internal crises, reaction to external crises, and the model of development of economic conflicts. According to the developed methodological recommendations and offered criteria, “conflict” level of socio-economic systems of developed countries – the USA and Germany, and developing countries – China and Russia is measured in the period of the 2008 global economic crisis.

Based on the offered classification, it is possible to forecast development and management of conflicts of various “conflict” socio-economic systems.

The purpose of the chapter is to compare social and economic effects that accompany crises of economic systems.

According to the adopted classification of causes of conflicts of socio-economic systems, the indicators that reflect potential social and economic causes of crisis are determined. Regression analysis is performed, and multiple regression dependence of economic growth of Russia’s economic system (values of growth of GDP in constant prices) on the indicators that characterize social and economic causes of crisis is determined; correlation analysis is performed and correlation of each indicator of causes and the indicator of economic growth is determined.

It is shown by the example of modern Russia that subjective (social factors) have the key role in determining cyclic fluctuations of economic system – together with objective (economic effects). Social causes of crisis are almost as important as economic causes. In view of generally acknowledged social consequences of crises (growth of inflation and unemployment level), it is possible to state a relatively equal role of economic and social effects that accompany crises of economic systems. The information and empirical basis of the chapter consists of the statistical materials of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the OECD. The research is performed by the example of modern Russia’s economic system; its timeframe covers 1999–2018 (recent 20 years).

The obtained conclusions show the necessity and open perspectives for specifying the existing theory of cycles in the aspect of inclusion of social effects into the model of cyclic (wave) fluctuations of economic systems.