voprecotestВопросы экономикиVoprosy Ekonomiki0042-8736Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP10.32609/0042-8736-2022-10-66-85voprecotest-3799Research ArticleЭКОНОМИКА ОТРАСЛЕВЫХ РЫНКОВINDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONК вопросу об отраслевой динамике фирмOn the issue of industry firm dynamicshttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7828-8946ЗаздравныхА. В.ZazdravnykhA. V.

Заздравных Алексей Витальевич, кандидат экономических наук, доцент кафедры политической экономии экономического факультета

Москва

SPIN: 3584-2126

Aleksey V. Zazdravnykh

Moscow

apkreforma@mail.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-9921-6965ТеняковИ. М.TenyakovI. M.

Теняков Иван Михайлович, доктор экономических наук, профессор кафедры политической экономии экономического факультета

Москва

SPIN: 2532-094

Ivan M. Tenyakov

Moscow

itenyakov@mail.ruМосковский государственный университет имени М.В. ЛомоносоваРоссияLomonosov Moscow State UniversityRussian FederationМосковский государственный университет им. М.В. ЛомоносоваРоссияLomonosov Moscow State UniversityRussian Federation2022091020220106685Copyright © Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP, 20222022Voprosy Ekonomiki, NPVoprosy Ekonomiki, NPhttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/about/submissions#copyrightNoticehttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/article/view/3799

Сегодня в российской научной литературе недостаточно изучена специфика отраслевой динамики фирм, особенно с позиций их потенциальных эффектов для результативности компаний. В статье оценено влияние процессов входа и выхода фирм на финансовые результаты и показатели производственной эффективности компаний молочной промышленности. Показано, что параметры входа и выхода фирм, наряду с уровнем промышленной концентрации, выступают значимыми факторами, определяющими как динамику валовой прибыли компаний, так и ее среднеотраслевую норму. На фоне снижения отраслевой динамики в 2017—2020 гг. выявлены падение ряда показателей инновационной активности компаний молочной промышленности и рост показателей их прибыльности. При этом влияние отраслевой динамики на показатели эффективности разнонаправленное: отрицательное применительно к производительности труда и положительное в плане эффективности использования основного капитала. Подтверждены теоретические выводы о более высокой производственной эффективности более молодых компаний. Для активизации отраслевой динамики необходимо стимулировать приток в промышленный сектор молодых и инновационных компаний, повысить число новых фирм, снизить влияние структурных и стратегических барьеров входа, улучшить условия предпринимательской деятельности в производственном секторе российской экономики.

Today, in the Russian scientific literature, the peculiarities of the development of industry firm dynamics remain understudied, especially from the standpoint of their potential effects on the firms effectiveness. This article evaluates the impact of the entry and exit of firms on financial results and performance indicators of dairy companies. It is proved that the entry and exit parameters of firms, along with the level of industrial concentration, are significant factors determining both the dynamics of gross profit of companies and the industry average rate of gross profit margin. Against the background of declining industry dynamics in 2017—2020, a slowdown of a number of indicators of innovative activity of dairy industry companies and an increase of their profitability indicators have been revealed. At the same time, the impact of industry dynamics on efficiency indicators is ambiguous: it is noticeable on labor productivity values, but no such impact is observed on the efficiency indicators of the use of fixed capital. The influence of the age of industrial companies on labor productivity and capital return has also been established, and the hypothesis of higher production efficiency of younger companies has been confirmed. It is necessary to stimulate the influx of young and innovative companies into the industrial sector, increase the number of new firms, reduce the impact of structural and strategic barriers to entry, and improve the conditions of entrepreneurship in the manufacturing sector of the Russian economy.

отраслевая динамика фирмвход на рыноквыход с рынкабарьеры входапромышленная концентрацияпроизводительностьfirm dynamicsmarket exitmarket entrybarriers to entryindustrial concentrationproductivityReferencesБессонова Е. В., Мякишева С. М., Цветкова А. Н. (2021). Кто выходит с рынка в период пандемии // Вопросы экономики. № 10. С. 113—133. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-10-113-133Bessonova E. V., Myakisheva S. M., Tsvetkova A. N. (2021). Market exits during the pandemic. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 10, pp. 113—133. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-10-113-133Заздравных А. В. (2020). Экспансия фирм на отраслевые рынки: теоретический взгляд сквозь барьеры // Проблемы современной экономики. № 2. С. 62—67.Zazdravnykh A. V. (2020). Firms’ expansion into industry markets: A theoretical look through barriers. Problems of Modern Economics, No. 2, pp. 62—67. (In Russian).Шаститко А. Е., Павлова Н. С. (2016). Общественно эффективные барьеры входа? // Балтийский регион. Т. 8, № 4. С. 34—52. https://doi.org/10.5922/2074-9848-2016-4-3Shastitko A. E., Pavlova N. S. (2016). Socially efficient entry barriers? The Baltic Region, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 34—52. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.5922/2074-9848-2016-4-3Шумпетер Й. А. (2008). Теория экономического развития. Капитализм, социализм и демократия. М.: Эксмо.Schumpeter J. A. (2008). The theory of economic development. Moscow: Eksmo. (In Russian).Asturias J., Hur S., Kehoe T. J., Ruhl K. (2020). Firm entry and exit and aggregate growth. FRB of Cleveland Working Paper, No. 19-03R, NYU Stern School of Business. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3328873Asturias J., Hur S., Kehoe T. J., Ruhl K. (2020). Firm entry and exit and aggregate growth. FRB of Cleveland Working Paper, No. 19-03R, NYU Stern School of Business. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3328873Bain J. (2013). Barriers to new competition: Their character and consequences in manufacturing industries. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674188037Bain J. (2013). Barriers to new competition: Their character and consequences in manufacturing industries. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674188037Bartelsman E., Scarpetta S., Schivardi F. (2003). Comparative analysis of firm demographics and survival: Micro-level evidence for the OECD countries. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 348. https://doi.org/10.1787/010021066480Bartelsman E., Scarpetta S., Schivardi F. (2003). Comparative analysis of firm demographics and survival: Micro-level evidence for the OECD countries. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 348. https://doi.org/10.1787/010021066480Bruno R., Bytchkova M., Estrin S. (2011). Institutions and entry: A cross-regional analysis in Russia. IZA Discussion Paper, No. 5504. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1765670Bruno R., Bytchkova M., Estrin S. (2011). Institutions and entry: A cross-regional analysis in Russia. IZA Discussion Paper, No. 5504. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1765670Carree M., Thurik R. (1996). Entry and exit in retailing: Incentives, barriers, displacement and replacement. Review of Industrial Organization, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 155—172. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00157664Carree M., Thurik R. (1996). Entry and exit in retailing: Incentives, barriers, displacement and replacement. Review of Industrial Organization, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 155—172. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00157664Clementi G., Palazzo B. (2013). Entry, exit, firm dynamics, and aggregate fluctuations. NBER Working Paper, No. 19217. https://doi.org/10.3386/w19217Clementi G., Palazzo B. (2013). Entry, exit, firm dynamics, and aggregate fluctuations. NBER Working Paper, No. 19217. https://doi.org/10.3386/w19217Estrin S., Prevezer M. (2010). A survey on institutions and new firm entry: How and why do entry rates differ in emerging markets? Economic Systems, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 289—308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2010.01.003Estrin S., Prevezer M. (2010). A survey on institutions and new firm entry: How and why do entry rates differ in emerging markets? Economic Systems, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 289—308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2010.01.003Geroski P. (1995). What do we know about entry? International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 229—251. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-7187(95)00498-XGeroski P. (1995). What do we know about entry? International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 229—251. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-7187(95)00498-XGil P. M. (2010). Stylized facts and other empirical evidence on firm dynamics, business cycle and growth. Research in Economics, Vol. 64, No. 2, pp. 73—80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rie.2009.11.001Gil P. M. (2010). Stylized facts and other empirical evidence on firm dynamics, business cycle and growth. Research in Economics, Vol. 64, No. 2, pp. 73—80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rie.2009.11.001Gourio F., Messer T., Siemer M. (2016а). Firm entry and macroeconomic dynamics: A state-level analysis. American Economic Review, Vol. 106, No. 5, pp. 214—218. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20161052Gourio F., Messer T., Siemer M. (2016а). Firm entry and macroeconomic dynamics: A state-level analysis. American Economic Review, Vol. 106, No. 5, pp. 214—218. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20161052Gourio F., Messer T., Siemer M. (2016b). A missing generation of firms? Aggregate effects of the decline in new business formation. Society for Economic Dynamics Meeting Papers, No. 752.Gourio F., Messer T., Siemer M. (2016b). A missing generation of firms? Aggregate effects of the decline in new business formation. Society for Economic Dynamics Meeting Papers, No. 752.Hathaway I., Litan R. (2014). Declining business dynamism in the United States: A look at states and metros. The Brookings Institution.Hathaway I., Litan R. (2014). Declining business dynamism in the United States: A look at states and metros. The Brookings Institution.Iwasaki I., Maurel M., Meunier B. (2016). Firm entry and exit during a crisis period: Evidence from Russian regions. Russian Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 162—191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruje.2016.06.005Iwasaki I., Maurel M., Meunier B. (2016). Firm entry and exit during a crisis period: Evidence from Russian regions. Russian Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 162—191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruje.2016.06.005Kotsios P. (2014). A practical method for diagnosing the existence of industrial barriers to entry. Research in Applied Economics, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 12—24. https://doi.org/10.5296/rae.v6i1.4643Kotsios P. (2014). A practical method for diagnosing the existence of industrial barriers to entry. Research in Applied Economics, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 12—24. https://doi.org/10.5296/rae.v6i1.4643Mansfield E. (1962). Entry, Gibrat’s law, innovation, and the growth of firms. American Economic Review, Vol. 52, No. 5, pp. 1023—1051.Mansfield E. (1962). Entry, Gibrat’s law, innovation, and the growth of firms. American Economic Review, Vol. 52, No. 5, pp. 1023—1051.Nyström K. (2006). Entry and exit in Swedish industrial sectors. JIBS Dissertation Series, No. 032.Nyström K. (2006). Entry and exit in Swedish industrial sectors. JIBS Dissertation Series, No. 032.Rosenbaum D., Lamort F. (1992). Entry, barriers, exit, and sunk costs: An analysis. Applied Economics, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 297—304. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849200000142Rosenbaum D., Lamort F. (1992). Entry, barriers, exit, and sunk costs: An analysis. Applied Economics, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 297—304. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849200000142Tian C. (2015). Cyclical patterns of business entry and exit dynamics in the US economy. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2694275Tian C. (2015). Cyclical patterns of business entry and exit dynamics in the US economy. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2694275

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.