2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
Institutional models of forest complex management: comparative analysis and classification of foreign experience
ru
Original Article|Economics
AbstractFull textReferencesFilesAuthorsAltmetrics
Introduction. The forest complex of Russia is a clear example of the incompatibility of established formal institutions with the preferences of economic agents. The conflict of endogenous and exogenous distribution gives rise to low economic efficiency. The correct adjustment of the institutions is possible only in conditions of compliance of the transformations with the requirements of economic agents and taking into account the influence of the "track effect". Thus, effective forest regions are characterized by a greater degree of compatibility of formal and informal institutions. The study of real market incentives of agents is possible in two ways: through the study of forms of resistance of agents to formal rules or, conversely, by studying the synergy of rules and preferences. The chain of institutional changes cannot be based solely on the elimination of the shortcomings of the system identified in the first way. The models of integration of institutions require empirical material based on the second stage of study.
Materials and methods. In this article, with the help of qualitative analysis and classification methods (modeling, synthesis, comparative and induction analysis), models of formal institutions (and, accordingly, indirectly institutions) of regions institutionally close to Russia (especially countries of continental law) with competitive forest industries are studied.
Results and conclusions. The boundaries of the formal model and the variables determining its character are indicated. Examples of different resource regimes and levels of ownership are considered, special attention is paid to the differentiation of state ownership of forests. The subjects of the industry regulators are specified, the classification by types of financing and functions performed is considered. Examples of relevant state forest policy instruments in the most relevant areas of development of the Russian forest complex are presented.
Discussion. It is shown that in a relatively inclusive institutional environment, state regulatory entities are individualized, and endogenous distribution is characterized by an increase in collective forms of participation. The key differences between the forest policy instruments of the designated environment from the formal institutions of Russia are a lower regulatory burden and another direction of stimulating mechanisms - forestry activities.
Materials and methods. In this article, with the help of qualitative analysis and classification methods (modeling, synthesis, comparative and induction analysis), models of formal institutions (and, accordingly, indirectly institutions) of regions institutionally close to Russia (especially countries of continental law) with competitive forest industries are studied.
Results and conclusions. The boundaries of the formal model and the variables determining its character are indicated. Examples of different resource regimes and levels of ownership are considered, special attention is paid to the differentiation of state ownership of forests. The subjects of the industry regulators are specified, the classification by types of financing and functions performed is considered. Examples of relevant state forest policy instruments in the most relevant areas of development of the Russian forest complex are presented.
Discussion. It is shown that in a relatively inclusive institutional environment, state regulatory entities are individualized, and endogenous distribution is characterized by an increase in collective forms of participation. The key differences between the forest policy instruments of the designated environment from the formal institutions of Russia are a lower regulatory burden and another direction of stimulating mechanisms - forestry activities.
Keywords: forest complex, formal institutions, state enterprise, institutional transformations, forest ownership rights
УДК: 630*64(470+571)
ВАК: 05.02.03
ГРНТИ: 06.52.41
Article received: July 03, 2023
Article accepted: July 29, 2023
Ogorodnikova, T. V., Solomein, A. A., & Shipunova, I. G. (2021). Methodology of economic science and problems of objectivity in economics. Baikal Research Journal, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.17150/2411-6262.2021.12(2).1.
Litvin, D. A., & Davydova, G. V. (2022). Dependence of the timber industry and forest sector efficiency on the ownership form: an international comparison. Social and Economic Systems, (6-2), 242–263. https://elibrary.ru/lxavjr.
Gavrilyuk, O. V., Gaidaenko, N. I., Shram, V. P., Maldonado, A. A., Merkulova, T. A., Popova, E. S., Sakovich, O. M., Semilyutina, N. G., & Solovyova, S. V. (2011). Legal regime of forests under the legislation of Russia and foreign states. Law House “Justitsinform”. https://elibrary.ru/qskfyv.
Nichiforel, L., Keary, K., Deuffic, P., Weiss, G., Thorsen, B. J., Winkel, G., Avdibegović, M., Dobšinská, Z., Feliciano, D., Gatto, P., Gorriz Mifsud, E., Hoogstra-Klein, M., Hrib, M., Hujala, T., Jager, L., Jarský, V., Jodłowski, K., Lawrence, A., Lukmine, D., Malovrh, Š. P., & Bouriaud, L. (2018). How private are Europe's private forests? A comparative property rights analysis. Land Use Policy, 76, 535–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.034.
Lallemand-Kirche, G., Tixier, C., & Piffaut, H. (2017). The Treatment of State-owned Enterprises in EU Competition Law: New Developments and Future Challenges. Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 8(5), 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lpx016.
Stevanov, M., & Krott, M. (2013). Measuring the success of state forest institutions through the example of Serbia and Croatia. International Forestry Review, 15(3), 368–386. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554813807700146.
Schmithusen, F. (2014). 300 years of practical application of the concept of sustainability in forestry. Sustainable Forest Management, (1), 2–8. https://elibrary.ru/szuafb.
Makarushkova, A. A., & Soloveva, I. V. (2019). Comparative legal analysis of modern civil law sources in Russia, France and Germany. Actual Problems of Russian Law, (12), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.109.12.149-161.
Litvin, D. A. (2023). Modeling of the institutional framework of the Russian forestry to determine the trajectory of the transformation of institutions. System Analysis and Mathematical Modeling, 5(2), 115–130. https://doi.org/10.17150/2713-1734.2023.5(2).115-130.
Kashtelyan, T. V. (2019). Features of rental relations in the forest complex. Proceeedings of BSTU. Issue 5. Economics and Management, (1), 41–48. https://elibrary.ru/zsgewl.
Pyzhev, A. I. (2019). Economic aspects of the future impact of climate change on Russian forestry. Journal of Institutional Studies, 11(3), 182–193. https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2019.11.3.182-193.
North, D. (1997). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Economic Book Foundation “Nachala”. https://elibrary.ru/yqdvye.
Volchik, V. V. (2011). Tacit Knowledge, Economic Coordination and Institutions. Scientific works of Donetsk National Technical University. Series: Economics, (2), 136–141. https://elibrary.ru/rmylup.
Ivantsova, E. D. (2020). Investment encouragement mechanisms in forestry sector: Analysis of global experience and its viability in Russia. Perm University Herald. Economy, 15(4), 566–586. https://doi.org/10.17072/1994-9960-2020-4-566-586.
Ivantsova, E. D., & Pyzhev, A. I. (2022). Factors of success of priority investment projects in the sphere of forest exploitation in Russia: Econometric analysis. Russian Journal of Economics and Law, 16(2), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2022.2.315-330.
© Article. Dmitriy A. Litvin, 2023.
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.