Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Institutional environment creating for attracting investment into infrastructure: The cases of Russian regions
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-2-134-157
Abstract
The article examines the institutional process in a regional economy connected with the infrastructure development. We use the neoinstitutional approach to study factors that influence the behavior of government and business in their interaction in the economy. We also use statistical methods to analyze the dynamics of socio-economic development indicators of the subjects of the Russian Federation as well as the results of measures to attract private investment into infrastructure, including the PPP. We chose the city of Moscow and the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District as two empirical case studies which differ in economic and geographic conditions, but both demonstrate success in attracting private investment and implementing infrastructure projects. Our conclusions are consistent with a theory that asserts the primacy of institutional environment in relation to project implementation. We make also some practical recommendations for the development of the institutional environment which are acceptable for all regions solving similar problems of infrastructure development.
About the Author
G. A. Borshchevskiy
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
George A. Borshchevskiy
Moscow
References
1. Akjulov R. I., Alferyev K. A. (2017). To the question of the interrelation of the investment activity and the debt obligations of the Russian regions. Voprosy Upravleniya, No. 1 (44), pp. 110—122. (In Russian).
2. Arkin V. I., Slastnikov A. D. (2017). Optimization of concession payments in stochastic model of public-private partnership. Journal of the New Economic Association, No. 4, pp. 31—48. (In Russian).
3. Barinova V. A., Zemtsov S. P., Tsareva Yu. V. (2018). Entrepreneurship and institutions: Does the relationship exist at the regional level in Russia? Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 6, pp. 92—116. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-6-92-116
4. Bezdenezhnykh V. I. (2015). Problems of development of the institutional environment of public-private partnership in Moscow. Teoriya i Praktika Obshchestvennogo Razvitiya, No. 19, pp. 62—66. (In Russian).
5. Boychuk N. P. (2016). The state of public-private partnership in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District at the present stage. Ekonomika i Upravlenie: Analis Tendentsiy i Persprectiv Razvitiya, No. 30, pp. 69—78. (In Russian).
6. Kazakova M. V., Lyubimov I. L., Nesterova K. V. (2016). Does a single reform’s success ensure faster growth? Weak institutions as a cause of reform failure. HSE Economic Journal, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 624—654. (In Russian).
7. Kondratov M. V., Garipov R. I. (2013). Theoretical approaches to understanding “institutional environment”. Fundamentalnye Issledovaniya, No. 11, pp. 1908—1911. (In Russian).
8. Konovalov A. M. (2017). Long-term planning of public infrastructure development as a priority of state and municipal government. RUDN Vestnik, GMU Series, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 50—66. (In Russian).
9. Miroshnikov S. N. (2018). State management of investment attractiveness and infrastructure development of territories: Problems and solutions. Upravlencheskoye Konsultirovanie, No. 9, pp. 29—35. (In Russian).
10. PPP Development Center (2018a). Review of i ndustry practices in implementing PPP projects 2017–2018. Moscow. (In Russian). http://pppcenter.ru/assets/files/240418-001.pdf
11. PPP Development Center (2018b). Draft national report on attracting private investment in infrastructure development and the use of public-private partnership mechanisms in the Russian Federation. Moscow. (In Russian). http://pppcenter.ru/assets/files/260418-rait.pdf
12. Rosstat (2017). Regions of Russia: Socioeconomic indicators. Moscow. (In Russian).
13. Rosstat (2018). Regions of Russia: Socioeconomic indicators. Moscow. (In Russian).
14. Savrukov A. N., Savrukov N. T., Kozlovskaya E. A. (2018). Assessment of the state and level of development of public-private partnership projects in the subjects of the Russian Federation . Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 7, pp. 131—141. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-7-131-141
15. Sukharev O. S., Voronchkhina E. N. (2018). Factors of economic growth: Empi rical analysis of i ndustriali zation and i nvestments in technological upgrade. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 6, pp. 29—47. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-6-29-47
16. Freidina I. A. (2017). International experience of infrastructure projects financing. Ekonomicheskaya Politika, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 196—203. (In Russian).
17. Center for PPP Development (2013). Rating of regions PPP-start 2013. Moscow. (In Russian ). http://pppcenter.ru/proektyi-czentra/rejting-regionov-po-gchp.html
18. Center for PPP Development (2014). The development of publicprivate partnership in the regions of the Russian Federation. Rating of regions PPP-2014. Moscow. (In Russian ). http://pppcenter.ru/assets/docs/raytingreg2014.pdf
19. Center for PPP Development (2015). Rating of Russian regions by the level of development of publicprivate partnership, 2014—2015. Moscow. (In Russian ). http://pppcenter.ru/assets/files/raytingREGBlock_26-03-2015_new_edition.pdf
20. Center for PPP Development (2016). The development of publicprivate partnership in Russia in 2015—2016. Rating of regions by the level of development of PPP. Moscow. (In Russian ). http://pppcenter.ru/assets/docs/raytingREG2016_B5_Block_04-04-2016.pdf
21. Center for PPP Development (2017). Publicprivate partnership in Russia 2016—2017: Current status and trends, rating of regions. Moscow. (In Russian ). http://pppcenter.ru/assets/docs/raytingREG2017_B5_Block_31-03-2017-web.pdf
22. Shаstitko A. Ye. (2017). Institutions designing — Theories and interests. Journal of the New Economic Association, No. 3, pp. 177—184. (In Russian).
23. Shilkina O. A. (2015). Public-private partnership as a tool for the development of public infrastructure in the region. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Series 26: Public Audit, No. 2, pp. 3—10. (In Russian).
24. Acemoglu D., Robinson J. (2008). The role of institutions in growth and development. New York: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
25. ASEAN (2014). Publicprivate partnership guidelines. Jakarta.
26. A.T. Kearney (2017). Global cities 2017: Leaders in a world of disruptive innovation. Chicago, IL.
27. Boyer E. J., Van Slyke D. M., Rogers J. D. (2016). An empirical examination of public involvement in public-private partnerships: Qualifying the benefits of public involvement in PPPs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 45—61.
28. Campra M., Oricchio G., Braja T. M., Esposito P. (2014). Sovereign risk and publicprivate partnership during the euro crisis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
29. Ernst & Young (2015). Publicprivate partnerships and the global infrastructure challenge. How PPPs can help governments close the “gap” amid financial limitations. London.
30. fDi (2018). fDi European cities and regions of the future 2018/19.London: Financial Times, Foreign Direct Investment Intelligence.
31. Glumac B., Han Q., Schaefer W., van der Krabben E. (2015). Negotiation issues in forming public-private partnerships for brownfield redevelopment: Applying a game theoretical experiment. Land Use Policy, Vol. 47, pp. 66—77.
32. Hoppe E. I., Kusterer D. J., Schmitz P. W. (2013). Public-private partnerships versus traditional procurement: An experimental investigation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 89, pp. 145—166.
33. Huyghebaert N., Wang L. (2016). Institutional development and financing decisions: Evidence from a cross-regional study on Chinese listed firms. European Journal of Finance, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 288—318.
34. IBRD (2012). Publicprivate partnerships: Reference guide. New York: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
35. Keune M. (2001). Regions, regional institutions and regional development. SEED Working Paper, No. 16. Geneva: International Labor Office.
36. Nagesha G., Gayithri K. (2014). A research note on the PPP of India infrastructure development. Journal of Infrastructure Development, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 111—129.
37. OECD (2012). Public governance of publicprivate partnerships. Paris.
38. Rodríguez-Pose A. (2013). Do institutions matter for regional development? Regional Studies, Vol. 47, No. 7, pp. 1034—1047.
39. Schwab K. (ed.) (2018). The global competitiveness report 2017—2018. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
40. Verougstraete M., Sekiguchi J. (2017). PPP policy, legal and institutional frameworks in Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok: ESCAP.
41. World Bank (2017). Contribution of institutional investors to private investment in infrastructure, 2011—H1 2017. Washington, DC.
Review
For citations:
Borshchevskiy G.A. Institutional environment creating for attracting investment into infrastructure: The cases of Russian regions. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2019;(2):134-157. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-2-134-157
Views:
1133
Email this article 
