Journal of Applied Economic Research
ISSN 2712-7435
Theoretical Model of the Multisubject Industrial Policy
Korovin G.B.
Abstract
The domination of the state in the industrial policy making carries an increased risk associated with accumulating inefficiencies. The vector of policy development is aimed at a transition from state to multisubject industrial policy in developed countries and in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Russia</st1:place></st1:country-region>. It is based on relationships effectiveness improving, creating institutions for the development and implementation of industrial policies. The aim and objectives of the work is to apply the multisubject approach and game theory to industrial policy development, to determine the range of parties interested in industrial policy, their interests, strategies, conflict areas and the zone of consensus. We used a multi-subject approach, which implies the existence of a number of independent entities that have their own goals and strategies. Methodology of game theory was used to analyze the subject’s interests, their coincidences and conflicts. As a result of the study, we identified the main positive aspects and additional risks caused by the application of the multi-subject approach to determining industrial policy priorities. We identified the process of forming an industrial policy, its features in terms of hierarchy, multiplicity, coalition, asymmetry game were described; three possible equilibria were selected. The theoretical model and the consensus zone took into account a number of additional factors: the state of the interaction institutions, the level of mutual trust, barriers, and incentives. The results and solutions can be used by authorities, industrial and public organizations as a characteristic of space for creating multiple mutually acceptable agreements between real and potential participants in the process of industrial policy development. Analysis of the obtained results confirms the conclusions obtained earlier about the positive influence of the institutionalization of interaction between business and the state on positive changes of the economic structure in the long run.
Keywords
Regional economy; industrial policy; multisubject industrial policy; game theory.
References
1. Grebenkin, A.V. (2014). Metodologicheskie printsipy evoliutsii sistemy vzaimodeistviia nauki i biznesa [Methodological principles of the evolution of the system of interaction between science and business]. Trudy VI Vserossiiskogo sim-poziuma po ekonomicheskoi teorii [Proceedings of the 6th All-Russia Symposium on Economic Theory], Vol. 2. Ekaterinburg, Institute of Economics of Urals branch of RAS, 82–83.
2. Kniazev, Iu. (2015). Kakoi sleduet byt' promyshlennoi politike Rossii (Which Kind of Industrial Politics is in Need in Russia). Svobodnaia mysl' [Free Thought], No. 4 (1652), 93–104.
3. Polterovich, V.M. (2014). Promyshlennaia politika: retsepty ili instituty (In-dustrial Policy: Recipes or Institutions?). Zhurnal novoi ekonomicheskoi assotsiatsii (Journal of the New Economic Association), No. 2 (22), 190–195.
4. Dement'ev, V.E. (2014). Ob orientirakh promyshlennoi politiki (About In-dustrial Policy Guidelines). Zhurnal novoi ekonomicheskoi assotsiatsii (Journal of the New Economic Association), No. 2 (22), 195–200.
5. Tatarkin, A.I., Romanova, O.A. (2014). Promyshlennaia politika: genezis, regional'nye osobennosti, zakonodatel'noe obespechenie (Industrial policy: Genesis, regional features and legislative provision). Ekonomika regiona (Economy of Region), No. 2, 9–21.
6. Cimoli, M., Dosi, G., Nelson, R., Stiglitz, J.E. (2006). Institutions and Poli-cies Shaping Industrial Development: An Introductory Note. Initiative for Policy Dia-logue, 24.
7. Noman, А., Stiglitz, J.E. (2016). Efficiency, Finance, and Varieties of Indus-trial Policy. Columbia University Press, 448.
8. Rodrik, D. (2006). Industrial Policy for the Twenty-First Century. CEPR Discussion Paper, No. 4767, 60.
9. Hochfeld, C. Kabel, C. (2010). Sustainable Industrial Policy for Europe: Governing the Green Industrial Revolution. Green European Foundation.
10. Andreoni, A. (2016). Varieties of Industrial Policy: Models, Packages and Transformation Cycles. Initiative for Policy Dialogue. University of Cambridge.
11. Chen, L., Naughton, B. (2016). An Institutionalized Policy-Making Mech-anism: China's Return to Techno-Industrial Policy. Research Policy, Vol. 45, No. 10, 2138–2152.
12. Devlin, R., Pietrobelli, C. (2016). Modern Industrial Policy and Public-Private Councils at the Subnational Level: Empirical Evidence from Mexico. IDB Technical Note, 37.
13. Kuznetsov, B.V., Simachev, Iu.V. (2014). Evoliutsiia gosudarstvennoi promyshlennoi politiki v Rossii (Evolution of state industrial policy in Russia). Zhur-nal novoi ekonomicheskoi assotsiatsii (Journal of the New Economic Association), No. 2 (22), 152–178.
14. Idrisov, G.I. (2016). Promyshlennaia politika Rossii v sovremennykh usloviiakh [Industrial policy of Russian in present-day conditions]. Moscow, Gaydar Institute.
15. Ermak, S., Ziakin, S. (2016). Netoroplivyi caravan [Slow-going caravan]. Ekspert, No. 43 (1005), 80–102.
16. Leont'ev, A.N. (2015). Nezavisimoe ekspertnoe soobshchestvo v region-al'noi promyshlennoi politike (Independent expert community in regional industrial policy). Nauchnyi vestnik Volgogradskogo filiala RANKhiGS. Seriia: Politologiia i sotsiologiia (Scientific Bulletin of Volgograd branch of RANEPA. Political science and Sociology), No. 1, 16–20.
17. Fudenberg, В., Tirole, J. (1987). Noncooperative Game Theory For Indus-trial Organization: An Introduction And Overview. Working paper (Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Economics), No. 445. University of California, Berkeley-Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 107.
18. Rozanova, N.M., Kokorin, V.S. (2013). Gosudarstvo i ekonomika: igra s nenulevoi summoi (Government and economy: a non-zero sum game). Terra Eco-nomicus, Vol. 11, No. 3, 20–33
19. Moulin, H. (1981). Theorie des jeux pour l'economie et la politique. Paris, Hermann.
20. Germeier, Iu.B. (1976). Igry s neprotivopolozhnymi interesami [Games with Non-contradictory interests]. Moscow, Nauka.
21. Romanova, O.A., Akberdina, V.V., Bukhvalov, N.Iu. (2016). Promyshlen-naia politika v vysokotekhnologichnom sektore ekonomiki: institutsional'nyi aspect (Industrial policy in high-techsector of the economy: Institutional aspect). Vestnik Zabaikal'skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of Baikal State Univeristy], Vol. 22, No. 8. 126–136.
About Authors
Korovin Grigoriy Borisovich – Candidate of Economic Sciences, Head of Sector, Institute of Economics, The Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Ekaterinburg, Russia (620014, Ekaterinburg, Moskovskaya street, 29); e-mail: grig_korovin@mail.ru.
For citation
Korovin G.B. Theoretical Model of the Multisubject Industrial Policy. Bulletin of Ural Federal University. Series Economics and Management, 2017, Vol. 16, No. 5, 744-759. DOI: 10.15826/vestnik.2017.16.5.036.
Article info
Received August 24, 2017; Accepted September 20, 2017.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/vestnik.2017.16.5.036
Download full text article:
~534 KB, *.pdf
(Uploaded
05.11.2017)
Created / Updated: 2 September 2015 / 20 September 2021
© Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education «Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N.Yeltsin»
Remarks?
select the text and press:
Ctrl + Enter
Portal design: Artsofte
Contact us
Rector's Office
Rector, Dr. Victor Koksharov
Tel. +7 (343) 375-45-03, e-mail: rector@urfu.ru
Vice-Rector for International Relations, Dr. Maxim Khomyakov
Tel. +7 (343) 375-46-27, e-mail: Maksim.Khomyakov@urfu.ru