Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Priorities and instruments of modern industrial policy: Subsidies for economic complexity
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2025-8-5-25
Abstract
The article examines contemporary priorities and instruments of industrial policy — defined as policies aimed at structural change in the economy — in the context of increasing geopolitical instability, technological competition, and the growing importance of structural transformation. An original index of the economic complexity of government financial support is proposed, based on the methodology of economic complexity, which allows for cross-country comparisons of the orientation of industrial support. An analysis of more than 6,500 unique regulatory acts from the GTA Corporate Subsidy Inventory shows that developed countries tend to support sectors with high technological complexity, while emerging market economies are more inclined to assist less complex but systemically important industries. It is also revealed that targeted SME support is often concentrated in traditional or simple sectors, serving functions related to social stability and inequality reduction. A positive correlation is found between a country’s overall economic complexity and the complexity of its industrial policy portfolio. At the same time, it appears that the industrial support provided by developed countries is relatively simpler compared to the complexity level of their national economies, whereas the priorities of emerging market economies are more often aligned with relatively complex sectors within their domestic contexts. Thus, catching-up economies aim to accelerate structural shifts toward technologically complex sectors, while developed economies can afford a more balanced approach to economic growth.
Keywords
industrial policy,
subsidies,
economic complexity,
state support,
structural transformation,
developed countries,
developing countries
JEL: O25; H25; L52; O33
About the Authors
Yu. V. Simachev
Authors affiliation: HSE University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yuri V. Simachev
Moscow
A. A. Fedyunina
Authors affiliation: HSE University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anna A. Fedyunina
Moscow
References
1. Dorzhieva V. V. (2019). Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union: A comparative analysis of the sectoral structure of the economy and industrial policy. Eurasian Scientific Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 1—12. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.15862/53ecvn119
2. Kadochnikov S., Fedyunina A. (2013). The impact of related variety in export on economic development of Russian regions. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 9, pp. 128—149. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2013-9-128-149
3. Lyubimov I. L., Lysyuk M. V., Gvozdeva M. A. (2018). Atlas of economic complexity, Russian regional pages. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 6, pp. 71—91. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-6-71-91
4. Maltsev A., Chichilimov S. (2025). Entrenchment of neo-protectionism in the global economy of the 21st century. World Economy and International Relations, Vol. 69, No. 4, pp. 5—14. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2025-69-4-5-14
5. Romanova O. A., Ponomareva A. O. (2020). Multi-vector industrial policy in Russia in an emerging new industrial landscape. Russian Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 276—291. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31063/2073-6517/2020.17-2.3
6. Simachev Y. V., Fedyunina A. A., Kuzyk M. G. (2022). Russian industrial policy in the context of global production system transformation and severe constraints. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 6, pp. 5—25. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2022-6-5-25
7. Smorodinskaya N. V., Katukov D. D. (2024). Moving towards technological sovereignty: A new global trend and the Russian specifics. Baltic Region, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 108—135. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2024-3-6
8. Aggarwal S. N., Aggarwal V. K. (2023). Rethinking the political economy of industrial policy. L’industria, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 583—626.
9. Andreoni A., Chang H. J. (2019). The political economy of industrial policy: Structural interdependencies, policy alignment and conflict management. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Vol. 48, pp. 136—150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2018.10.007
10. Bala Subrahmanya M. H. (2013). External support, innovation and economic performance: What firm level factors matter for high-tech SMEs? How? International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 17, No. 5, article 1350024. https://doi.org/10.1142/s1363919613500242
11. Bargoni A., Ferraris A., Vilamová Š., Wan Hussain W. M. H. (2024). Digitalisation and internationalisation in SMEs: A systematic review and research agenda. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 37, No. 5, pp. 1418—1457. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeim-12-2022-0473
12. Bouwman H., Nikou S., De Reuver M. (2019). Digitalization, business models, and SMEs: How do business model innovation practices improve performance of digitalizing SMEs? Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 43, No. 9, article 101828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101828
13. Chang H. J., Amsden A. H. (1994). The political economy of industrial policy. London: Macmillan. Chang H. J., Andreoni A. (2020). Industrial policy in the 21st century. Development and Change, Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 324—351. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12570
14. Chege S. M., Wang D. (2020). Information technology innovation and its impact on job creation by SMEs in developing countries: An analysis of the literature review. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 256—271. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1651263
15. Chen J., Xie L. (2019). Industrial policy, structural transformation and economic growth: Evidence from China. Frontiers of Business Research in China, Vol. 13, No. 1, 13—18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s11782-019-0065-y
16. Cherif R., Hasanov F. (2019). The return of the policy that shall not be named: Principles of industrial policy. IMF Working Paper, No. 2019/074. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781498305402.001
17. Cirera X., Maloney W. F. (2017). The innovation paradox: Developing-country capabilities and the unrealized promise of technological catch-up. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1160-9
18. Criscuolo C., Díaz L., Lalanne G., Guillouet L., van de Put C. É., Weder C., Deutsch H. Z. (2023). Quantifying industrial strategies across nine OECD countries. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 150. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f2dcc8e-en
19. Criscuolo C., Gonne N., Kitazawa K., Lalanne G. (2022). Are industrial policy instruments effective? OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 128. https://doi.org/10.1787/57b3dae2-en
20. Criscuolo C., Martin R., Overman H. G., Van Reenen J. (2019). Some causal effects of an industrial policy. American Economic Review, Vol. 109, No. 1, pp. 48—85. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160034
21. DiPippo G., Mazzocco I., Kennedy S., Goodman M. P. (2022). Red ink: Estimating Chinese industrial policy spending in comparative perspective. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic & International Studies.
22. Doh S., Kim B. (2014). Government support for SME innovations in the regional industries: The case of government financial support program in South Korea. Research Policy, Vol. 43, No. 9, pp. 1557—1569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.001
23. Dvouletý O., Srhoj S., Pantea S. (2021). Public SME grants and firm performance in
24. European Union: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Small Business Economics, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 243—263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00306-x
25. Evenett S., Jakubik A., Martнn F., Ruta M. (2024). The return of industrial policy in data. The World Economy, Vol. 47, No. 7, pp. 2762—2788. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.13608
26. Gomez E. T., Cheong K. C., Wong C. Y. (2021). Regime changes, state—business ties and remaining in the middle-income trap: The case of Malaysia. Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol. 51, No. 5, pp. 782—802. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2021.1933138
27. Goldberg P. K., Pavcnik N. (2016). The effects of trade policy. In: K. Bagwell, R. W. Staiger (eds.). Handbook of commercial policy, Vol. 1, Part A. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 161—206. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hescop.2016.04.002
28. Hartmann D., Zagato L., Gala P., Pinheiro F. L. (2021). Why did some countries catch-up, while others got stuck in the middle? Stages of productive sophistication and smart industrial policies. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Vol. 58, pp. 1—13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2021.04.007
29. Hausmann R., Hidalgo C. A., Bustos S., Coscia M., Simoes A. (2014). The atlas of economic complexity: Mapping paths to prosperity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9647.001.0001
30. Hidalgo C. A. (2021). Economic complexity theory and applications. Nature Reviews Physics, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 92—113. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-020-00275-1
31. Hidalgo C. A. (2023). The policy implications of economic complexity. Research Policy, Vol. 52, No. 9, article 104863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104863
32. Hidalgo C. A., Hausmann R. (2009). The building blocks of economic complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 26, pp. 10570—10575. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900943106
33. IMF, OECD, World Bank, WTO (2022). Subsidies, trade, and international cooperation. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400208355.064
34. Juhász R., Lane N., Oehlsen E., Pérez V. C. (2022). The who, what, when, and how of industrial policy: A text-based approach. Available at SSRN: https://doi. org/10.2139/ssrn.4198209
35. Juhász R., Lane N. J., Oehlsen E., Perez V. C. (2025). Measuring industrial policy: A text-based approach. NBER Working Paper, No. w33895. https://doi.org/10.3386/w33895
36. Juhász R., Lane N., Rodrik D. (2023). The new economics of industrial policy. Annual
37. Review of Economics, Vol. 16, pp. 213—242. https://doi.org/10.1146/annureveconomics-081023-024638
38. Khajehpour B. (2020). Anatomy of the Iranian economy. Swedish Institute of International Affairs Paper, No. 6/2020.
39. Krugman P. (1993). The current case for industrial policy. In: D. Salvatore (ed.).
40. Protectionism and world welfare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 160—179. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511521997.008
41. Lane N. (2020). The new empirics of industrial policy. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 209—234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-019-00323-2
42. Lauridsen L. S. (2018). New economic globalization, new industrial policy and late development in the 21st century: A critical analytical review. Development Policy Review, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 329—346. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12299
43. Lin J. Y. (2017). Industrial policy and China’s economic development: From the perspective of new structural economics. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 419—429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-017-0201-z
44. Mariotti S. (2024). “Win—lose” globalization and the weaponization of economic policies by nation-states. Critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 638—659. https://doi.org/10.1108/cpoib-09-2023-0089
45. Martin F. (2024). Which industrial policies target high-end goods? An economic complexity-based approach. Global Trade Alert Zeitgeist Series, No. 33.
46. Mealy P., Coyle D. (2022). To them that hath: Economic complexity and local industrial strategy in the UK. International Tax and Public Finance, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 358—377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-021-09667-0
47. Moreno-Brid J. C. (2013). Industrial policy: A missing link in Mexico’s quest for export-led growth. Latin American Policy, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 216—237. https://doi.org/10.1111/lamp.12015
48. Pack H., Saggi K. (2006). The case for industrial policy: A critical survey. World Bank Research Observer, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 267—297. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkl001
49. Raes S. (2021). Understanding SME heterogeneity. OECD SME and Entrepreneurship Papers, No. 28. https://doi.org/10.1787/c7074049-en
50. Rodrik D. (2022). An industrial policy for good jobs. Hamilton Project Policy Proposal, September.
51. Rotunno L., Ruta M. (2024). Trade spillovers of domestic subsidies. IMF Working Paper, No. 2024/041. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400269486.001
52. Samford S. (2022). Decentralization and local industrial policy in Mexico. World Development, Vol. 158, article 105971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105971
53. Tereshchenko E., Happonen A., Porras J., Vaithilingam C. A. (2023). Green growth, waste management, and environmental impact reduction success cases from small and medium enterprises context: A systematic mapping study. IEEE Access, Vol. 11, pp. 56900—56920. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2023.3271972
54. UNCTAD (2019). International classification of non-tariff measures. New York: United Nations Publications.
55. Veugelers R. (2008). The role of SMEs in innovation in the EU: A case for policy intervention. Review of Business and Economics, Vol. 53, No. 3, pp. 239—262.
56. Warwick K. (2013). Beyond industrial policy: Emerging issues and new trends. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k4869clw0xp-en
57. Warwick K., Nolan A. (2014). Evaluation of industrial policy: Methodological issues and policy lessons. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 16. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jz181jh0j5k-en
58. Winders B. (2009). The politics of food supply: US agricultural policy in the world economy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
59. Wonglimpiyarat J. (2015). New economics of innovation: Strategies to support hightech SMEs. Journal of High Technology Management Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 186—195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2015.09.006
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Simachev Yu.V., Fedyunina A.A. Priorities and instruments of modern industrial policy: Subsidies for economic complexity. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2025;(8):5-25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2025-8-5-25
Views:
33
Email this article 
