Paradoxes of Social Policy in Developing Social Infrastructure

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33917/es-2.176.2021.38-44

The state’s responsibility for development of social infrastructure has not been questioned by modern Russian and foreign economists for many years. An indicator of implementing the national goals of the Russian Federation development for the period up to 2030 is not only an increase in life expectancy up to 78 years, but also a half reduction in the poverty level compared to indicator of 2017 [1], which points out the need not only to ensure additional income for the elderly, but also to reduce their costs. In the context of limited budgetary opportunities, the state’s social policy is focused on developing commercial sector of social services and the sector of socially oriented NPOs that are not interested in development of capital-intensive infrastructure component at social tariffs. Private stationary facilities are targeted at wealthy people and are inaccessible to most elderly people who have to turn to the gray services market. Excessive commercialization has embraced even state-owned infrastructures, created or reconstructed through the mechanism of public-private partnership. This results in limited availability of public good and competition for access to it.

How to Overcome Stagnation and New Crisis, Providing Socio-Economic Growth

DOI: 10.33917/es-6.172.2020.6-19

In April 2020, Russia entered a structural social and financial-economic crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic and catastrophic decline of oil and gas exports. Assessing the current socio-economic situation in the country, the author concludes that, in contrast to the crisis of 2009, which was mainly financial and economic in nature, the 2020 crisis for the most part has got a social character, when indicators of the people’s well-being are declining particularly. According to the author, only return to planning would ensure implementation of an integrated financial plan, an investment program for the whole country, directive indicators of enterprises and organizations controlled by the state, as well as would impact public-private partnership.

How to Overcome Stagnation and New Crisis, Providing Socio-Economic Growth

DOI: 10.33917/es-5.171.2020.34-45

In April 2020, Russia entered a structural social and financial-economic crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic and catastrophic decline of oil and gas exports. Assessing the current socio-economic situation in the country, the author concludes that, in contrast to the crisis of 2009, which was mainly financial and economic in nature, the 2020 crisis for the most part has got a social character, when indicators of the people’s well-being are declining particularly. According to the author, only return to planning would ensure implementation of an integrated financial plan, an investment program for the whole country, directive indicators of enterprises and organizations controlled by the state, as well as would impact public-private partnership

Public-private partnership: current state and development dynamics

One of the tools for implementing the project approach in the public administration field, improving the financial, technological and innovative potential of various sectors of the Russian economy is public-private partnership (PPP). A comparative assessment of the dynamics of the public-private partnership development in Russia and abroad determines the purpose of this paper. The paper also presents an analysis of trends in the development of the PPP market, which caused a surge of interest in PPP on the business part and the risks that arise in the process of PPP projects’ implementing.

National Models of the Defense Industry Strategic Development: International Experience and National Practice

#4. Window of Opportunities
National Models of the Defense Industry Strategic Development: International Experience and National Practice

The article presents comparative analysis results of national models of the defense industry strategic development in the United States, Western Europe and China. It examines the influence of the national mentality, national business culture and existing business traditions in the countries under consideration on integration processes development in the defense industry, organizational forms applied and mechanisms. The article dwells on characteristics of the civil-military integration mechanisms, public-private partnerships and inter-ethnic cooperation, reveals features of their implementation in different countries of the world. It presents conclusions on the possibility of adapting the advanced foreign experience to domestic practice of strategic management of the defense industry development.