Relevance of the research topic. The presence of fundamental approaches to substantiating the concept of sustainable development at the mega and macro levels is currently combined with the practical absence of systemic theoretical and model ideas about the mechanisms for managing the sustainable development of the socio-economic system at the meso level. The conceptual foundations for managing the sustainable development of socio-economic systems of individual regions, although they take into account the all-Russian approaches to managing sustainable development, nevertheless, are formed under the influence of the features of the systemic organization of the economy of a particular region. The global processes of globalization and regionalization, on the one hand, and the processes of market transformation of the economy, the modernization of federal relations in Russia, on the other hand, determine their multidirectional and contradictory impact on the sustainability of the development of regional socio-economic systems within a single national market space. In this regard, there is an objective need to develop regional models of sustainable development management with the aim of their consistent systemic aggregation into an interregional model of an emergent type, and then into a national one.

The problem of ensuring sustainable development at the mega and macro levels is considered mainly from the standpoint of an anthropocentric approach that focuses on coordinating the goals of socio-economic development with a limited capacity. ecological system. Without belittling the importance of the environmental component of sustainable development, we note that special role of the region as its subject, first of all, is due to the fact that the regional economy is an integral reproductive system, within which the reproduction of the socio-territorial community itself, the total regional product that satisfies social needs, as well as the factors of its production is carried out. The reproduction approach to the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region allows us to present it as an integral system in all the diversity of economic, innovative, social and environmental features of development, ensures the implementation of the principle of consistency in the study of sustainable development problems.

The transition to a new paradigm of managing the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region requires studying the internal mechanism of its sustainable development, determining its driving forces and imperatives, building spatio-temporal models for a comprehensive assessment of the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region, taking into account the susceptibility of the current economic environment to innovation, balance in the development of system-forming elements of the regional economy, the stability of the dynamics of its indicators.

In Russian conditions, the reproductive approach to the sustainable development of regional socio-economic systems is of great interest. This is due to the fact that the main reason for the unstable type of development of regional socio-economic systems in Russia is the imbalance of reproductive mechanisms, which manifests itself in the deformation of reproductive proportions in the sphere of material production, the processes of depopulation and the lack of an effective mechanism for the distribution of labor resources, the deepening of interregional differentiation in levels of socio-economic development of territories. Particularly deep disproportions in the system of social production are characteristic of the peripheral regions of the South of Russia, which are immanent in the low adaptive capacity of the sectoral structure of the economy, the imbalance in the proportions of the distribution of production factors in various sectors and areas of activity, the discrepancy between the region's needs for financial resources and the actual level of resource endowment, between their investment potential and investment activity, an abnormal level of socio-economic divergence of regions.

In the context of inconsistency, uneven development of the South of Russia in space and time, the process of transferring regional socio-economic systems to a sustainable development mode requires the rejection of the unification of relations with subjects economic activity, pursuing a structural policy that is adequate to the specifics of the socio-economic structures of the southern Russian regions - pre-industrial, preserved within the framework of traditional economic activities characteristic of ethnic regions; industrial, based on the secondary sector of the economy; as well as the emerging post-industrial. The need to ensure the interaction of these structures determines the importance of activating the integration resource of the southern Russian regions and, above all, such forms as the creation of a single program-target space based on the coordination of the interests of all its constituent entities, the development of interregional clusters based on the integration of the efforts of government and business , the formation of interregional institutions of the investment and innovation system.

The degree of development of the problem. Analysis scientific papers in the field of sustainable development shows that scientists for almost two centuries from different theoretical and methodological positions have addressed the problems of equilibrium of socio-economic systems. The existence of a sustainable development trajectory is substantiated in the fundamental works of the classics of economic thought - V. Leontiev, R. Solow, J. Stiglitz, J. Hartwick, as well as a number of modern foreign scientists: E. Barbiera, T. Gilfason, X. Daly , I. Kwerner, A. Markandia, K. Renings, W. Hubert, A. Enders and others.

Regional factors of economic growth and sustainable development, as well as approaches to modeling the sustainable development of territories at various levels, were developed in the works of domestic economists: I. Yu.

Blam, A.G. Granberg, T.N. Gubaidullina, V.I. Gurman, V.I. Danilova-Danilyana, I.I. Dumova, G.B. Kleiner, K.S. Loseva, V.E. Seliverstova, A.I. Tatarkin and other authors. The methodological foundations for studying the sustainable development of regional socio-economic systems from the standpoint of the reproduction approach were identified by O.V. Inshakov, A.A. Kerashev, O.A. Lomovtseva, I.N. Oleinikova, O.S. Pchelintsev.

The theory of economic dynamics, developed in the works of N. Kondratiev, I. Schumpeter, R. Harrod, F. Kydland, E. Prescott, S. Menshikov, L. Klimenko, Yu. Yakovets. The synergetic paradigm of the development of regional socio-economic systems is based on the conclusions presented in the works of I. Prigozhin, I. Stengers, T. Wag. The concept of transition from the "space economy" to the "time economy" as a condition for innovative reproduction was developed in the works of P.C. Bekova, O.Yu. Mamedova, O.V. Inshakova, Yu.M. Osipov.

V.M. Belousov, A.G. Druzhinin, N.P. Ivanov, V.G. Ignatov, N.P. Keto-wa, H.H. Lebedeva, V.N. Ovchinnikov, L.I. Ushvitsky, I.V. Shevchenko.

In the course of the reforms, studies of the problems of the structural transformation of the socio-economic system, including at the regional level, have noticeably intensified, in which an analysis is made of the influence of the dynamics of structural proportions on the sustainable development of the region. Fundamental studies of the patterns of structural evolution of economic systems are presented in the works of the classics - C. Clark, D. Bell, and have been widely developed in the works of modern domestic economists: O.S. Belokrylova, J1.A. Dedova, A.B. Evchenko, E.N. Kuzbozheva, E.V. Samofalova, Yu.V. Yakovets and others.

In recent years, there has been a lively discussion about the admissibility of the polarization of the country's economic space, which are based on the theories of regional growth by J. Borts, X. Richardson, X. Siebert, the theory of growth poles and diffusion of innovations by F. Perrow, G. Myrdal, T. Hegerstrand . Factors and dynamics of interregional differentiation are revealed in the works of S. Baranov, B. Lavrovsky, A. Polynev, T. Skufyina, S. Suspicin.

Positive and negative effects of the impact of the processes of globalization and localization, as well as socio-cultural and ethno-economic factors on the sustainability of the development of regional systems were identified by A.I. Buzgali-nym, Yu.S. Kolesnikov, E. Kochetov, J. Stiglitz, A.Kh Tambiev.

The mechanisms of organization and management of regional systems based on a combination of market mechanisms and state regulation instruments, the algorithm for the formation of a regional development strategy were substantiated by V.G. Aliyev, A.N. Alisov, V.G. Vvedensky, A.L. Gaponenko, B.S. Zhikharevich, M.M. Guzev, O.V. Kuznetsova, V.N. Knyaginin,

B.N. Leksin, A.P. Pankrukhin, P.A. Popov, D.S. Lvov, F.F. Rybakov, E.V. Ryumina, S.G. Tyaglov, A.N. Shvetsov, B.M. Shtulberg.

The ideas proposed in the scientific literature for creating new institutions for the innovative development of the region are aggregated in three areas:

Formation of the concept of the network economy and regional clusters of economic recovery (V. Galayda, F. Ingelman, A. Oreshenkov, M. Porter);

Multi-aspect study of the evolution and prospects for the functioning of special economic zones (E. Aleksandrov, A. Arkhipov, I. Belozerov,

C. Belozerova, R. Zimenkov, S. Naryshkin, P. Pavlov);

Development of model-theoretic ideas and conceptual foundations for innovative investment (N. Klimova, R. Melnikov, Ya. Sergienko, D. Turchanovsky, A. Folomiev, A. Frenkel).

Despite the significant contribution of the above and other authors to solving urgent problems in the space of the outlined problems, many theoretical and methodological problems of managing the sustainable development of regional socio-economic systems require further research. This is due to the lack of development of a number of problems in the methodology of studying sustainable development, building an adequate reproduction model for managing the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region, adequate to the current stage of economic growth. There is still a discussion about the system for identifying the vector and nature of the development of a region or another territorial socio-economic system (for example, a district) in the context of a transition to sustainable development, which allows developing and adjusting a regional development strategy. Despite the variety of theoretical developments in the field of regional sustainable development management, the concepts, tools and technologies of regional economic policy used today need serious modernization.

Insufficient development of conceptual and methodological approaches, the need to take into account the diversity of new factors that were not previously included in the research arsenal when modeling sustainable development, led to the choice of the research topic, setting its goals and objectives.

Purpose and objectives of the study. The purpose of the dissertation work is to theoretically and methodologically substantiate and conceptually describe the model of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region from the position of the reproduction approach and develop a mechanism for its implementation in management practice.

The algorithm for achieving the set goal provides for the solution of a number of milestone tasks, aggregated into five blocks:

1. Formation of the theoretical and methodological basis for the study of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region:

Summarize the methodological foundations of the study of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region;

To characterize the region as a reproductive system, the sustainability of which is determined by the interaction of resource subsystems and their elements.

2. Development of tools for diagnosing the sustainability of the development of the socio-economic system of the region: to substantiate the system of indicators for assessing the sustainable development of the regional socio-economic system; construct a model version of the assessment of the sustainability of regional development, taking into account the trends in the state of the socio-economic system of the region, as well as the degree of similarity (difference) of the reproduction proportions of the regions.

3. Assessment of the conditions and features of the systemic organization of the economy of the South of Russia in the context of sustainable development:

To carry out monitoring of the conditions and features of the reproduction of resource potential and material benefits in the southern Russian regions;

Substantiate at the theoretical and methodological level the causes and factors of reproduction of interregional socio-economic differentiation of the South of Russia and assess the level of interregional differences;

Specify the influence of ethno-economic factors and the process of globalization on the sustainability of the socio-economic development of the southern Russian regions.

4. Development of conceptual foundations for managing the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region:

Reveal the importance of the integration resource of meta-regional formations in the formation and implementation of a sustainable development strategy;

Model an algorithm for strategic planning of sustainable socio-economic development of the meta-region;

Identify key areas for optimizing the structure of the region's economy, based on the condition of limited resources and the efficiency of their use;

To identify directions for rationalizing the use of the natural resource potential of the territory, taking into account the long-term goals of the socio-economic development of the region.

5. Justification of approaches to the formation of new institutions that are adequate to the requirements of expanded innovative reproduction: to develop proposals for the development of the network economy and regional clusters; generalize foreign experience and Russian practice creation of special economic zones and assess the possibilities of using their potential in the sustainable development of the socio-economic systems of the southern Russian regions; to model the theoretical and conceptual components of the regional investment and innovation system.

The object of research is a complexly structured and spatially localized regional socio-economic system that ensures the reproduction of a socio-territorial community, an aggregate regional product that satisfies social needs, as well as factors of its production. The subject of the study is the economic conditions, factors and structural proportions of sustainable reproduction of regional socio-economic systems, models, tools and mechanisms for managing reproduction processes at the mesolevel of the national economy.

Theoretical and methodological foundations of the study. The interdisciplinary, multidimensional and multilevel nature of the problem of sustainable development of regional socio-economic systems necessitated the use of the following theoretical and methodological approaches in the process of its study:

Anthropocentric approach, according to which sustainable development involves a balanced solution of the tasks of socio-economic development in the future and the preservation of a favorable state of the environment and natural resource potential in order to meet the vital needs of the population of the territory;

Evolutionary-cyclical theory and the theory of dynamic disequilibrium, with high resolution research of transformation, dynamics, integration and differentiation of regional systems in the system of developing social relations;

General systems theory, in which the socio-economic system is studied as a complex multilayer, polystructural, hierarchical system, consisting of many components of different quality (subsystems, structures, elements) interconnected various types relationships and connections, as well as synergy effects;

Neoclassical and institutional theories, placing different accents in the choice of driving forces for the development of regions, analyzing the diverse aspects of causal relationships in the spatial economy;

Theories and concepts of regional development - the theory of production location, the concept of "growth poles", the theory of comparative advantages - which substantiate the features of the development of territorial socio-economic systems.

Instrumental and methodological apparatus of the study. When developing the problem, a wide epistemological toolkit was used, including methods of systemic, structural-functional and comparative analysis; economic and mathematical (methods of vector algebra) and information modeling, phenomenological analysis, statistical methods(private ranking, correlation analysis, index methods), programming tools. The combination and address-selective use of the analytical and heuristic potential of each of these particular methods in solving the milestone problems of the dissertation research, ordered by a single algorithm for achieving the goal, ensured the reliability, reasonableness of the estimates and the reliability of the conclusions.

The information and empirical base of the study was formed on the basis of official data of the Federal State Statistics Service, departmental reports and reports, as well as materials of monographic studies by domestic and foreign scientists. The information basis for the formation of a mathematical model for the sustainable development of socio-economic systems in the regions of the South of Russia was regional empirical and factual data collected, processed and introduced into scientific circulation by the author. A representative set of statistical data used, respectively processed, analyzed, generalized, economically interpreted and commented, ensured the reliability of the research results and the reasoned validity of practical recommendations.

The logic of the study consists in moving from the formation of an abstract definition of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region from the position of the reproduction approach and identifying the system-forming elements and factors immanent to it, through the study and justification of the dynamics and structural proportions of the socio-economic development of the South Russian regions, the features of the systemic organization of the South Russia in the context of providing expanded innovation-oriented reproduction, to the construction and verification of the concept of managing the sustainable development of the region based on stimulating the development of its internal reproductive potential on a specific regional empirical and factual material.

The concept of the study is based on the reproduction paradigm of sustainable development of the region and consists in developing a conceptual model for the transition of the economy of the South of Russia with its immanent inertial structure of production, selective investment attractiveness, high interregional asymmetry, a significant ethno-economic component and a low level of involvement in the global geo-economy on the trajectory of sustainable development based on strengthening the system-forming production, economic, institutional and infrastructural ties and interaction between the subjects of the Federation of the South Russian meta-region, the formation of a strategically oriented economic modernization of its reproductive structure, both due to internal factors of economic development and rational use resources within the framework of combining the strategies of state support for regions-“locomotives” and mechanisms for leveling the levels of socio-economic development of regions, as well as global factors and conditions integrating the South Russian region into world economic relations.

The main provisions for defense:

1. The sustainable development of the regional economic system as a process of expanded reproduction of the elements of the productive forces and the entire life support environment of the territory is ensured by the stability of the circulation of factors of production and the material goods produced with their use in the process of uninterrupted change in the general economic stages of the reproduction process - production, distribution, exchange and consumption. In the conditions of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region, each stage of the reproduction cycle includes an innovative component, since the latter are not only created as a product of the cycle, but also participate in changing its functional content and organizational structure.

2. A necessary prerequisite for the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of polyethnic regions is the established socio-economic genotype as an information-connecting mechanism of social inheritance and social change, which ensures the reproduction of the structure, principles of functioning, processes of regulation, learning and interconnection of generations. The basis of the structure of the socio-economic genotype is the system of socio-economic interests and culture of society, which determine the mode of population reproduction (its constant renewal as a result of natural, migration (movement between regions) and social (movement from one social group to another) movement), incentives for innovations, preferences of the ethno-specific structure of consumption of material and spiritual goods. The socio-economic genotype at the surface level of social relations is manifested in the structure of the elements of the social and economic mechanism. Inconsistencies and contradictions between the elements of the genotype indicate a violation of the stability of the entire socio-economic system of the region.

3. A comprehensive assessment of the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region includes three aspects: innovativeness of the reproduction process; balance in the development of the system-forming elements of the socio-economic system of the region, i.e. such a state of it, when positive changes within one system do not lead to a deterioration in the parameters of another, and the rate of change in regional indicators. This involves the construction of three matrices in a two-dimensional coordinate system: the reproduction innovation matrix (the level of development of the region - innovation); matrix of Pareto-optimality (level of development of the region - Pareto-optimality); matrix of the rate of change in the ratio of the values ​​of basic indicators (the level of development of the region - the rate of change of indicators). The level of development of the region and integral indicators characterizing the state of regional subsystems are measured by the length (modulus) of the vector, the components of which are indicators of sustainable development of the region. The rate of change in the values ​​of the basic indicators is determined by the angle between the vectors characterizing the development of regions: the larger the angle between the vectors that reflect the position of the region for two different points in time, the more changes occur during this period in the ratio of the characteristics of the region and the more intensive the shifts are in the proportions of the compared indicators.

4. In accordance with the values ​​of the coefficient of structural elasticity, determined by the ratio of the reconstructive and inertial components of the growth rate and reflecting the level of change in the volume of output as a result of a change in the sectoral structure of the South of Russia as a whole, as well as its regions, 5 phases of the business cycle are distinguished: innovative growth; extensive growth; compensatory replacement phase; stagnation and structural crisis. Stagnation and structural crisis necessitate structural transformations in the regional economy, so these phases are followed by phases of compensatory replacement or innovative growth. However, in the absence of regional mechanisms and institutions that stimulate innovative development, innovative growth is unstable, short-lived and transforms into an extensive type of growth, the preservation of which in the long term leads to deterioration in the conditions of reproduction and subsequent stagnation of the economic development of the region.

5. The ineffectiveness of the policy of priority state support for the regions that are “engines of growth” (the policy of “polarized development”) as an alternative to the policy of equalizing the levels of socio-economic development of regions is due to the lack of real mechanisms for ensuring the diffusion of innovations to other regions of Russia, the effect of the effects of regional competition, deepening the asymmetry of levels development of territories. Under these conditions, a flow of qualified personnel from problem areas will rush to the core regions, as well as an increase in the inter-regional flow of capital to the “points of growth” regions. Increasing losses of human and production capital of the vast periphery, limitation of the domestic market by interregional exchange between the regions-mi- "engines of growth" with the symbolic participation of the periphery can exceed the economic benefits from the realization of the effect of the agglomeration economy in the regions-"local centers", deepen reproductive disproportions and violate stability the national socio-economic system as a whole. The argument against the policy of polarized development is the lack of objective technologies for selecting regions - "points of growth", violation of the principles of federalism and ignoring the social effect that reduces the sustainability of regional development.

6. As the age-old way of economic life most resistant to various external influences, ethno-economy (especially its agrarian component) in the crisis phase of cyclic-wave macrodynamics played the role of a depreciation-buffer, damper device in the mechanism of reformation transformations, which softened the destructive impact of market-transformational transformations. However, the preservation of the dominance of the traditional component of the ethno-economy in the long term leads to the fact that the high inertia of the reproductive structure of the region does not allow timely response to the changing needs of society. As a result, ethno-economy plays a dual role in ensuring the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region: on the one hand, it has the potential for anti-crisis protection; on the other hand, it reinforces the inertia of socio-economic development, slows down the time of innovation.

7. Harmonization of interests positioned at different levels requires a redistribution of power prerogatives between the federal center and the subjects of the Russian Federation in favor of the latter, as well as their regional totality - the federal districts. Federal districts as state institute the implementation of regional policy can be included in the process of ensuring the diffusion of innovations and the formation of a competitive meta-regional economic complex based on the accelerated development of sectors of all-Russian specialization and stimulating economic integration of the subjects of the Federation located within their borders.

8. From the point of view of ensuring the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region, the optimal is a reproductive structure that has the potential to meet social needs to the maximum possible (ceteris paribus) due to internal factors of economic development, rational use of resources and the benefits of including interregional and international commodity exchange. In this regard, when studying the qualitative side of shifts in the reproductive structure of the region, it is proposed to use an integral indicator of the structural efficiency of the reproductive system, which includes:

Resource use efficiency coefficient characterizing the reproduction structure from the point of view of technological changes occurring in the conditions of the existing economic structure and allowing to assess the resource-technological balance of the reproduction system;

The coefficient of efficiency of satisfaction of needs, showing how fully the structural links of the reproduction system ensure the satisfaction of the needs of individuals and society in goods and services of certain sectors of the economy;

Integration of the region into the system of interregional and international trade.

9. One of the mechanisms for increasing the sustainable development of the socio-economic systems of the regions is inter-regional economic integration. Industries capable of becoming the locomotive of the socio-economic development of such regions become the basis for the formation of inter-regional clusters under the patronage of the federal districts. In this sense, “industries affiliated with the cluster” include those priority sectors of the regional economy that, with the help of scientifically based tools for regulating regional development, can be integrated into the relevant specialized interregional clusters that have competitive advantages. From the point of view of the development of the economy of the South of Russia, it is promising to create agro-industrial and tourist-recreational clusters that ensure the fullest use of the potential of the ethno-economic component of the South Russian economy and generate a multiplier effect for the entire socio-economic system of the region.

10. The formation of the necessary prerequisites for the sustainable development of socio-economic systems in the regions of the South of Russia is ensured by the implementation of the concept of "growth poles", including through the creation of special economic zones (SEZ) in the South Russian meta-region and their integration into the world economy, stimulating the development of internal potential region, generating innovations, which then spread throughout the region, contributing to the optimization of the regional reproductive structure.

The scientific novelty of the work lies in the substantiation of the methodological approach to the study of the sustainable development of the socio-economic system based on a combination of reproductive, resource and institutional approaches, as well as the use of methods system analysis and the theory of economic dynamics in the study of factors, trends and models of development of territorial socio-economic systems in the South of Russia, identifying the functional content of managing the sustainable development of the region and developing an algorithm for the institutionalization of innovative processes of reproduction at the mesolevel. The specific increment of scientific knowledge is as follows:

1. A methodology has been developed for studying the problem of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region by synthesizing the following approaches and theories:

Methodology of institutional changes, based on the determinism of economic processes and allowing to model the management of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region as the implementation of the functions of planning, organization, motivation and control in resolving conflicts of interests of its economic entities;

The reproduction approach, in which the sustainable development of the region is characterized as an organic unity of innovative processes of production, distribution, exchange and consumption, which have their own regional characteristics;

A systematic approach that interprets sustainable development and provision of conditions for expanded reproduction of resource potential as a system-forming function of the socio-economic system of the region and offers methods for studying complex objects;

A synergetic approach that singles out instability and instability as sources of development and studies movement as a non-equilibrium process with a result different from a simple addition of the expected effects of individual elements of the system;

The theory of economic dynamics, in accordance with the general methodological component of which, in any process, a constant component or trend, as well as an oscillatory component or wave, should be distinguished.

2. The author's version of the content of the category "sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region" is proposed as a controlled process of expanded and innovative reproduction of production factors and material goods produced with their help due to the balanced development of the system-forming elements of the socio-economic system of the region. At the empirical level, sustainable development is characterized by a monotonous change in regional indicators or their change within normal market cycles, the dynamics of the values ​​of which is quite predictable in the short and medium term. This made it possible to substantiate a set of methods for analyzing spatial development, including the author's methodology for monitoring the sustainable development of a region using vector algebra methods, and to perform a phenomenological analysis of the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the regions of the South of Russia, which revealed the instability of its trajectory and made it possible to identify the imperatives of their sustainable development.

3. The features and problems of the systemic organization of the economy of the South of Russia are identified, which form an unstable type of development of the regional socio-economic system and are manifested in the cyclic nature of the development of the sectoral structure of the regional economy and its low adaptive capabilities; redistribution of the employed from the primary and secondary sectors of the economy to the quaternary; deformation of sectoral and territorial investment proportions; depopulation and imbalance between the professional and qualification characteristics of labor resources and the imperatives of the emerging innovative economy of the southern Russian regions; low saturation of innovative time (dominance of the economy of space over the economy of time); the predominance of entropy processes.

4. An empirical verification of the theories of regional economic growth in relation to the socio-economic systems of the South of Russia was carried out, which showed that the provisions of X. Siebert's theory about the conditionality of interregional differences in reserves and the rate of capital accumulation, as well as the frequency of technical innovations, find empirical confirmation in the regions of the South of Russia, however the presence of a tendency to equalize inter-regional differences by moving capital from highly developed areas with low investment returns to less developed areas, characterized by a higher return on investment, is the most debatable moment of this theory. The level of wages, on the contrary, is lower in less developed regions, so labor resources are moving to highly developed regions. Therefore, the transition to a regional policy of polarized development in Russian conditions will increase the degree of interregional inequality. A high correlation is shown between the degree of involvement of the South Russian regions in foreign economic activity and indicators of their social progress, which is consistent with the conclusions of the export base theory.

5. Based on the dynamics of indicators of the involvement of the regions of the South of Russia in the global economy, models of regional development are classified, including: a reproduction and investment model characteristic of regions with a high level of involvement of the economy in modern global network interactions (Krasnodar Territory); an innovative and developing model typical of regions in which export-import operations are actively carried out and an effective innovation-receptive structure is being formed industrial production, which creates the basis for the development of international production cooperation and other forms of investment cooperation (Rostov and Volgograd regions); a structurally conservative model, immanent in regions with a relatively low level of foreign economic activity and the inertia of the existing structure of production, in which the phenomenon of globalization is manifested mainly in the entry into foreign markets of some of the largest and most stable enterprises (Astrakhan Region and Stavropol Territory); trade and intermediary model, which is typical for regions with a high dependence of quantitative and qualitative indicators of exports on the implementation of one-time export deliveries, which largely determine the nature of the exports of these regions (Ingushetia, Kalmykia); an import-oriented model that describes the situation in regions with a small amount of exports with a fairly high dependence on imports and the absence of foreign investment and companies with foreign capital (Dagestan and North Ossetia

Alanya); a model of localized development, which is being tested in the southern Russian republics with extremely low values ​​of indicators of inclusion in the global economy (Adygea, Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachay-Cherkessia). The geo-economic vector of sustainable development of regional socio-economic systems within each model is identified, in accordance with which proposals for the modernization and restructuring of regional economic complexes are formulated.

6. Substantiated as a necessary condition for the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the meta-region is the functional and structural merging into systemic integrity of previously isolated regional economic complexes based on the development of such integration network inter-regional economic structures as territorial production clusters, special economic zones, logistics inter-regional centers, institutions of general service, as well as expansion as the conditions for the economic and regulatory functions of the districts are formed, the formation of a single interregional program-indicative space. A schematic diagram of strategic planning of meta-regional sustainable development is proposed, including forecasting-analytical, target, conceptual, instrumental blocks, block of controlling and correction.

7. A new methodological approach to the selection of a potential economic core of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region is proposed, based on the construction of three matrices in a two-dimensional coordinate system: the production efficiency matrix, within which the analyzed industries are positioned in the coordinate system "index of production - the duration of the financial cycle »; matrices of social and budgetary efficiency "share of employment in the industry - share in taxes received"; matrix of environmental efficiency "resource-capacity - the level of anthropogenic load of the industry". The identified potential economic cores of sustainable development must be integrated into the relevant specialized interregional clusters, and the projects implemented in them must receive priority support from the Agency for Investment and Development of the South of Russia and the closed-end investment fund "Development of the South of Russia".

8. The mechanisms for resolving the emerging contradictions of economic interests in the field of nature management and ensuring the expanded reproduction of natural resources are substantiated, including the restoration of environmental funds in the regions on a new organizational basis, the improvement of the regional regulatory framework, a systematic approach to the procedure for the formation and implementation of environmental programs, taking into account the motivation of environmental activities, enhancing the potential of the financial and credit system (primarily the banking sector) in the formation of an effective system of environmental management. This made it possible to outline the contours, structure and imperatives of the development of the South Russian agro-industrial and tourist-recreational clusters, as which the effectiveness of formal and informal mechanisms for integrating cluster members and overcoming the fragmentation of the economy of the South of Russia is highlighted. The forms of participation in the development of clusters of federal, regional and municipal authorities, the mechanisms for consolidating the investment resources of its participants are determined.

9. A mechanism has been developed for influencing the subjects of the federation, which are part of the Southern Federal District, on structural shifts in the economy, based on the use of such an effective tool for transforming free cash resources into investments as regional targeted loans. At the same time, the regional authorities act as the issuer, and the role of the general agent is assigned to the direct investment fund of the South of Russia. Taking into account the investment and budgetary parameters of the southern Russian regions, the use of three borrowing schemes is proposed, the application of which can be carried out both integrated in the contours of a single loan, and individually in various models and types of borrowing.

The theoretical significance of the study lies in the theoretical and methodological substantiation and conceptual description of the model of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region from the standpoint of the reproduction approach and the development of a mechanism for managing its sustainable development. The provisions, conclusions and proposals obtained during the dissertation research develop and supplement a number of sections of economic theory and regional studies and can serve as a theoretical basis for improving the regional development management system. The theoretical conclusions of the dissertation research can also be used in educational process when improving the curricula of training courses " Economic theory”, “Regional Economics and Management”, “Territorial Organization of the Population”, “Economics of Nature Management”, “State Regulation of the Economy” and the development of special theoretical courses “Management of the Spatial Development of the Territory”, “Strategic Planning of the Socio-Economic Development of the Territory”, etc.

The practical significance of the work lies in the development of specific provisions, methods and recommendations to improve the efficiency and consistency of management decisions on the sustainable development of regions. Theoretical conclusions, the developed models, the proposed methodological and methodological tools for diagnosing and assessing the sustainability of regional socio-economic systems can be used in the development of strategies for regional and interregional development.

Approbation of the work was carried out in the process of reports and discussions of its results at more than 30 international, all-Russian and regional scientific and practical conferences and forums in Moscow (2005, 2006), Sochi (2005, 2007), Tambov (2004), Togliatti (2004), Rostov-on-Don (1995, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006), Novocherkassk (2007), Pyatigorsk (2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008), etc.

The materials of the dissertation research were used by the author when performing fundamental research work on the topic "Sustainable development of the region", registered in VINITI No. 01.20.03 01753-, economic contract topics within the framework of the regional target program "Ecology and environmental protection of the Stavropol Territory", scientific and applied research on the topic: "Interregional socio-economic differentiation and its impact on the content of target programs for the development of the subjects of the Southern Federal District" commissioned by OJSC “International Center for Socio-Economic Research “Leontief Center” (St. Petersburg), in the development of advanced training programs for civil servants.

The main provisions of the dissertation work are the basis of the course "Regional Economics and Management" read by the author at the faculty of management of the branch of the Federal State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "North Caucasus Academy of Public Administration", as well as specialized courses at the faculty of advanced training and retraining of personnel "Management of spatial development of the territory", "Strategic planning of social - economic development of the territory”, etc.

Theoretical and methodological developments of the author of the dissertation research have been brought to the level of specific scientific and applied activities carried out by the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the Stavropol Territory, to analyze the possibilities and determine the directions of the socio-economic development of the region, the Department of Federal Target Programs for the Development of Regional Infrastructure of the Ministry of Regional Development of the Russian Federation.

The results of the study were reflected in 53 scientific papers with a total volume of 53.25 square sheets, including copyright - 46.4 square sheets.

The structure of the dissertation consistently reveals the purpose and objectives of the study and consists of an introduction, five chapters, uniting 15 paragraphs, a conclusion, a list of references, numbering 315 titles, and 2 applications. The work includes 46 tables, 25 figures.

CONCLUSION

The undertaken study of the essential aspects of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region and the mechanisms for implementing the sustainable development model from the standpoint of reproduction approaches made it possible to formulate the following conclusions:

1. The study of the essential aspects of the sustainable development of the socio-economic system revealed the diversity of its definitions. The resource approach proceeds from the interchangeability of the main parts of capital and considers sustainable development as development provided by reducing the consumption of non-renewable resources and increasing the consumption of human-created resources, reinvesting the rent from the use of natural capital into economic capital. According to the biospheric approach, sustainable development is development that does not lead to a decrease in natural capital, that is, this approach takes into account only the state of the ecological subsystem. The most common in the domestic literature is the ecological and economic approach, the supporters of which consider sustainable development as a stable socio-economic development that does not destroy the natural environment and ensures the continuous progress of society. In recent years, a reproductive approach to the problem of sustainable development has been formed in economic science, focusing on the use of resources in a reproductive mode.

From the standpoint of the reproductive paradigm, sustainable development is considered in the work as an organic unity of innovative processes of production, distribution, exchange and consumption, which have their own regional characteristics. Under the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region, we propose to understand the controlled process of innovative reproduction of factors of production and material goods through the balanced development of the system-forming elements of the socio-economic system of the region, which ensures its social progress.

2. The methodological foundations of the reproduction approach to the study of the sustainable development of the regional socio-economic system are based on the combination, interweaving and synthesis of complementary elements of the methodological and theoretical potential of various approaches to the study of the sustainable development of socio-economic systems at different levels: the methodology of institutional changes, systemic and synergistic approaches, theory of economic dynamics.

The methodology of institutional changes is the basis for identifying the determinants of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region, analyzing the impact of the changed environment on the subjects of dynamic processes, studying the specifics of reproduction processes in the region, forming the organizational and economic foundations for managing the development of the socio-economic system of the region, implementing the functions of planning, motivation, control in resolving conflicts of interests of economic entities.

The systematic approach forms a toolkit for studying regions as complex objects, analyzing the structure of the regional system, its subsystems and elements, the relationships between them, and ensures the formation of an algorithm for managing the sustainable development of the socio-economic system based on strengthening the links between individual subsystems and their elements.

Synergistic approach involves the knowledge of the patterns of self-organization of complex objects in conditions of spontaneous structuring, the assessment of the structural complexity and stability of the regional system, the study of non-equilibrium states of the socio-economic system of the region, the development of mechanisms for managing non-equilibrium regional systems in order to bring them to the trajectory of sustainable development.

The methodology of economic dynamics is deepened in the work from the standpoint of using cyclic-wave concepts in the study of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region and allows you to identify the multiplicity of options for regional development, determine the vector of development of the system and its deviation from the trajectory of sustainable development, test progressive and inhibitory factors for each evolutionary turn, the correspondence of the productive forces of the region to one or another technological order.

The methodological key to the study of the problem of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region is the analysis of ways to organize its economic space and the economic time of the region, within which a stable time is distinguished, which reveals the stability and orderliness of the course of economic processes and their interdependence, and innovative time, which measures the speed of economic development. systems. The adequacy of the study of the problem of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region is ensured on the basis of the integration of the properties of time and space. This is due to the fact that, firstly, the development of elements of the economic space is carried out at different speeds, i.e. at different innovative times, which leads to the asymmetry of the space itself; secondly, resources, factors and conditions localized in the space of the region are classified taking into account their orientation in time, i.e. according to the criterion of interaction of space and time.

3. The region as a subject of sustainable development acts as a reproductive system characterized by the interaction of resource subsystems: environmental, social, economic and innovative, the unity of which is ensured by a complex system of direct and feedback links.

The sustainable development of the region as a subject of specific socio-economic relations associated with the territorial organization of social production and representing a special structural element (meso level) of the national system of production relations means the balance of four major groups of factors:

Economic, among which the key ones are the dynamism and efficiency of the reproductive structure of the region, the state of the production and market infrastructure, the degree of spatial differentiation of the territory, globalization and economic integration;

Ecological, including the rate of reproduction of natural resources and the quality of the environment, the assimilation potential of the region;

Political and legal, including the geopolitical component of regional development, the effectiveness of political institutions and structures of civil society, political culture, the balance between the political powers of the center and regions;

Socio-cultural, reflected in the socio-economic genotype, the basis of the structure of which is the system of socio-economic interests and the system of cultural elements of a given society.

The selected factors in their unity influence the stability of the socio-economic system of the region, which characterizes their interdependence.

4. The analysis of the sustainable development of the regional system involves its study in three aspects: the innovativeness of the reproduction process (the matrix of innovativeness of reproduction); balance in the development of the system-forming elements of the socio-economic system of the region, i.e. such a state when positive changes within one system do not lead to a deterioration in the parameters of another (Pareto-optimality matrix); the rate of change of regional indicators (matrix of the rate of change in the ratio of values ​​of basic indicators).

The combination of three matrices - the matrix of Pareto-optimality, the matrix of innovativeness of reproduction and the matrix of the rate of change in the ratio of the values ​​of basic indicators - demonstrates the unsustainable development of the socio-economic systems of the South of Russia.

Nevertheless, in some southern Russian regions, the prerequisites for the transition to sustainable development have developed. Thus, we believe that the Pareto-optimality of the socio-economic system of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic and the observed increase in the innovativeness of reproduction will act as factors for accelerating the pace of development of the region. The imperative of sustainable development of the region is the rate of change of indicators and their correlation. In this regard, the priority direction of improving the regional development management system is to determine the mission, goals and objectives of the region's development and their reflection in specific quantitative indicators, as well as the formation of an effective system for monitoring their implementation.

The most favorable conditions for the transition to sustainable development have been formed in the Krasnodar Territory and the Rostov Region. The imperative of sustainable development of these regions is to ensure the Pareto-optimality of the socio-economic system. Therefore, when developing program documents, it is necessary to ensure the linkage of the parameters of the economic, social and environmental subsystems.

A similar task is facing the Astrakhan and Volgograd regions. However, for the Volgograd region, as well as for the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic, the priority for the sustainable development of the regional socio-economic system is the improvement of goal-setting, controlling and correction systems within the framework of program-targeted management of regional development.

The imperative of sustainable development of the Astrakhan region is the improvement of the innovation process. Improving the innovation process through the creation of a rational balanced management system innovation process, corresponding to the emerging structure of the economy, its goals and objectives, will help increase the efficiency of the reproduction process, saturate the innovative time, the transition from the "economy of space" to the "economy of time" and, ultimately, ensure the sustainable development of regional socio-economic systems. Ensuring the sustainable development of the socio-economic system lies in finding the innovative potential in each of the constituent elements of the reproductive potential and the ability to use it in harmony with other parts of the overall potential. For example, the modernization and renewal of fixed assets without appropriate processes in other elements of the potential will not give the expected results, but will lead to the loss of a significant part of investment resources.

Entering the trajectory of sustainable development of the rest of the South Russian regions is possible only in the long term and requires a phased solution of a whole range of tasks.

5. The key imperative of sustainable development is the orderly correlation of reproductive elements, the interaction of which determines the dynamic development of the system. The study of the dynamics and proportions of the reproduction of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation that are part of the Southern Federal District allows us to conclude that the socio-economic systems of the regions of the South of Russia are unsustainable, the saturation of innovative time is low (the dominance of the economy of space over the economy of time), the predominance of entropy processes, poor adaptation of the system and its elements to external environment. There is an imbalance in the main proportion of the market economy - between the supply of goods and services, expressed through the produced gross regional product, and domestic demand, calculated through the sum of final consumption and gross capital formation

An analysis of the nature and dynamics of the structural proportions of the regions of the Southern Federal District testifies to the cyclicity in the development of the sectoral structure of the economy of the South of Russia and makes it possible to identify five phases: innovative and extensive economic growth, compensatory replacement, stagnation and structural crisis. Stagnation and structural crisis 1997-1999 determine the need for structural transformations in the economy of the regions. Therefore, these phases are followed by a phase of compensatory replacement or innovative growth. The most dynamic structural transformations were observed in the regions of the Okrug in 1999-2001. However, innovative growth in the subjects of the Southern Federal District is unstable, short-lived due to the lack of regional mechanisms and institutions that stimulate innovative development, and since 2002 in most subjects of the Southern Federal District it has been transformed into extensive growth, the preservation of which in the long term leads to a deterioration in the conditions of reproduction and subsequent stagnation. .

Along with the deformation of structural proportions, there are negative trends in the dynamics of socio-economic proportions. The proportions between effective demand and the saturation of the regional consumer market with goods and services in the South of Russia are distorted, which is due to a change in the mode of household consumption with an inertial structure of production. The nature of the process of reproduction of labor resources is due to depopulation, a decrease in the migration growth of the population, an imbalance between its professional and qualification characteristics and the requirements of the economy of the southern Russian regions, a lack of coordination between the supply of specialists by educational institutions and the real needs of the region's economy, a violation of the reproductive and stimulating functions of wages, the presence economic and environmental imbalances that characterize the relationship between the capacity of the natural potential of the ecosystem and the level of socio-economic development of the region.

6. Differentiation in the growth rates of the economy of the South Russian regions is determined by the influence of capital reserves and the rate of its accumulation, the frequency of technical innovations and the level of involvement in foreign economic activity, territorial differences in the level of profitability of capital investments.

The implementation of the policy of polarized development will lead to a deepening of inter-regional inequality due to the lack of mechanisms for the diffusion of innovations from the core regions to the peripheral ones, the effects of regional competition, which ensure the inter-regional overflow of skilled labor and capital from problem regions to the regions - "points of growth", the result of which are the growing loss of human and production capital of the vast periphery, the limitation of the domestic market by inter-regional exchange between regions-locomotives of growth ”with the symbolic participation of the periphery.

7. A feature of the systemic organization of the South of Russia is the significant influence of ethno-economy on the system of regional reproduction, which increases in the peripheral ethnic territories under the influence of the rent-oriented behavior of ethnic elites; high ethno-social barriers that reinforce the segmentation of the economic space of the regions, inefficient splitting of the bundle of property rights.

Ethno-economy plays a dual role in ensuring the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region: on the one hand, as the age-old way of economic activity most resistant to various external influences, in the crisis phase of cyclic development, it contributed to an increase in the degree of stability of the socio-economic systems of the southern Russian regions, softening the destructive impact of crisis-destructive phenomena; on the other hand, the preservation of the dominance of the traditional component of the ethno-economy in the long term leads to the fact that the high inertia of the reproductive structure of the regions of the South of Russia does not allow timely response to the changing needs of society, and, ultimately, economic growth degenerates into stagnation, inertia of socio-economic development is created , innovation time slows down.

In this regard, the key task of the development of the South of Russia is the transition from the traditional ethno-economy, associated with the inheritance by the ethnic group of historically established types, forms and methods of management, to the innovative one, due to its adaptive abilities; creation of institutional conditions for the modernization of the ethno-economic component and its integration into the regional reproduction process.

8. Modern globalization has a dual nature of impact on the sustainable development of the South of Russia: on the one hand, it expands its economic space, reduces transaction costs and increases the mobility of production factors, transforming the innovative time of the region, ensuring the acceleration of its socio-economic development; on the other hand, it gives an additional impetus to the growing divergence of socio-economic and technological development of the regions. The economic space of the South of Russia, under the influence of globalization, is segmented into separate regional economic complexes that have a certain stable set of functions and their own niche in the global economy, which can be described within six models: reproduction and investment (Krasnodar Territory); innovation-developing (Rostov and Volgograd regions); structural conservation (Astrakhan Region and Stavropol Territory); trade and intermediary (Ingushetia, Kalmykia); import-oriented (Dagestan and North Ossetia-Alania); localized development (Adygea, Kabardino-Balkarian and Karachay-Cherkess republics).

9. The logical result of the “globalization-localization” dichotomy has become modern meta-regional integration formations as a process of functional and structural merging into a systemic integrity of previously isolated regional economic complexes, ensuring interconnectedness, interdependence and sustainable development of macro- and meso-level systems. However, federal districts, as a form of organization and functioning of meta-regional entities, appear rather as conglomerates of regional economies with common prerequisites for improving the conditions for reproduction based on strengthening cooperative ties between economic entities of various spheres, segments, sectors and levels. The paper proposes a strategic approach to the process of activating the integration resource of these conglomerates based on the redistribution of power prerogatives between the federal center and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in favor of the federal districts, expanding their economic functions. We believe that federal districts should be a special institution of regional policy, to which such attributes of economic power should be transferred from the federal level, such as control over the implementation and financing of federal targeted programs for the development of the district, the distribution of federal transfers among the subjects of the Russian Federation included in the district, the formation of state orders. The economic functions of the federal districts should be of a system-forming nature. Among these functions, first of all, it is necessary to single out the creation of a single program-indicative space, the development of interregional infrastructure and the formation of commodity and financial interregional markets with the prospect of their integration into the all-Russian market; management of structural shifts and optimization of the sectoral structure of the economy; rationalization of the use of the natural resource potential of the territory, taking into account the long-term goals of socio-economic development and ensuring environmental safety. The implementation of the economic functions of meta-regional formations will provide a synergistic effect based on the creation of conditions for closer managerial, economic and socio-cultural interaction between regions.

10. The basis for the management of a meta-regional entity is the strategic planning of its development, the concept of which includes five functional blocks: predictive-analytical, target, conceptual, instrumental; block of controlling and correction, within the framework of which the so-called sustainable development corridor is determined, the boundaries of which can be the characteristics of vectors (length and angle) constructed for pessimistic and optimistic development scenarios.

Taking into account the polarization in the level of socio-economic development of the regions of the South of Russia, differences in mentality, culture, traditions, due to the polyethnicity of the population of the district, the most difficult task of strategic planning for the development of a meta-regional formation, we see the determination of the desired future state from a consolidated point of view of all its constituent regions. To implement it, the work proposes to create a Strategic Planning Council under the Administration of the Plenipotentiary Representative of the President, which would include representatives of the authorities and administration of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation included in the district, directly involved in the development of the concept of socio-economic development of the region, representatives of civil society, regional experts.

11. As a general direction for increasing the efficiency of using the economic space of the territory and ensuring its sustainable development, there is the formation of an optimal reproductive structure that has the potential to meet social needs as much as possible both through internal factors of economic development and rational use of resources in the framework of combining strategies for state support of regions - " locomotives” and mechanisms for leveling the levels of socio-economic development of regions, as well as global factors and conditions that integrate the southern Russian region into world economic relations.

Determining the optimal structural proportions is possible based on the construction of three matrices in a two-dimensional coordinate system: production efficiency, within which the analyzed industries are positioned in the coordinate system “production index - duration of the financial cycle”; social and budgetary efficiency - "the share of employees in the industry - the share in taxes received"; environmental efficiency - "resource intensity - the level of anthropogenic load of the industry."

The criteria for assessing the optimality of structural changes are:

Efficiency of resource use, estimated on the basis of the ratio of indicators of labor productivity, capital productivity and resource productivity of the region with the average for the country;

The efficiency of meeting the needs of the population, defined as the ratio of the actual final consumption in the region with the average Russian value;

The integration of the region into the system of interregional and international commodity exchange, estimated on the basis of the ratio of the export of goods produced in the region within the framework of interregional and international commodity circulation to the volume of their production.

Based on these coefficients, an integral indicator of the structural efficiency of the reproductive system is calculated. Analysis of its dynamics in the Southern Federal District for the period from 2000 to 2005. led to the conclusion that there are positive structural shifts in the economy of the meta-region, manifested in an increase in the efficiency of resource use, a rational combination of the production of goods and services for final consumption, and an increase in the welfare of the population. At the same time, there has been a trend towards a decrease in the level of integration of the region into the system of interregional and international commodity exchange.

12. The ecological imperative, acquiring a social function, is the regulating beginning of the reproduction process, providing the conditions for the implementation of expanded reproduction and sustainable development of the region. In this regard, an important component of the management system for the sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region is the management of the reproduction of the environment.

The main instruments of economic management of environmental reproduction at the regional level are:

Environmental funds operating on a new organizational basis. Prior to 2000, environmental funds mainly provided subsidies for environmental activities. In the short term, funds from environmental funds should be used as sources of environmental investment and promote the development of progressive mechanisms for financing environmental activities. Management of the activities of funds must be carried out by the board of funds, which includes representatives of government, credit, environmental and other organizations. The main objective of the funds should be the most efficient recycling of resources allocated to support priority environmental measures. All loans for environmental projects must be granted on the basis of an environmental-economic audit, a declared impact and quantifiable environmental indicators;

Environmental programs that ensure the linkage of economic, social and environmental standards with the system of specific environmental measures of the program and their implementation on schedule. The mechanism of regulation of the environmental program for the purpose of its effective implementation should be represented by a set of economic, organizational, administrative, legal and socio-psychological measures of influence. At present, the emphasis should be placed on measures of economic and organizational regulation that contribute to obtaining a greater environmental and economic effect from the implementation of the program activities;

Involvement of the banking sector in the implementation of state environmental programs. Among the advantages of this kind of integration are: the relative speed of providing funds to the recipient; reduction of risks associated with the provision of funds for the state budget (both due to the preliminary selection of applicants, and through the assumption by the bank of responsibility for the intended use of funds); more efficient use of budgetary funds and reduction of the managerial burden on government departments based on the higher competence of banks in evaluating investment projects and the established system of control over targeted spending of funds.

One of the main directions in the formation of an effective system of environmental management in the region is the improvement of the regional regulatory framework that regulates the use of such economic instruments as: tax incentives, concessional lending, a tender for the disposal of solid household and non-toxic industrial waste, a tender for the right to conclude a contract for the performance of work liquidation of unauthorized dumps with subsequent land reclamation, etc.

13. The imperatives of territorial adaptation, as well as focusing on the priority solution of developing tasks, require the formation of a network economy through the creation of vertically integrated systems that implement a full reproduction cycle, and the development of horizontally integrated structures in the form of integrated intersectoral clusters.

However, the formation of clusters of economic recovery in the problem regions is extremely difficult. Even if they have objective prerequisites for the development of some basic industry of the cluster, then the industries that support the development of the cluster and largely determine its innovative content are either absent or in a deplorable state. Therefore, a key role in the recovery of the economy of problem regions is given to interregional economic integration. Industries capable of becoming the locomotive of the socio-economic development of such regions should not be considered as the basis for the formation of a cluster, but as an element of another, more powerful cluster, which is being formed on an interregional basis, possibly under the patronage of federal districts. In this sense, it seems appropriate to introduce into circulation the concept of “industries affiliated with the cluster”, meaning by them those priority sectors of the economy of the regions that, with the help of scientifically based tools for regulating regional development, can be integrated into an interregional cluster that has competitive advantages formulated by M. Porter.

Recently, in the scientific literature, much attention has been paid to clusters that form the contours of the new economy. This is important, but the sectors of the traditional economy should not be forgotten. Scientific and innovative activities in traditional industries, primarily the agro-industrial complex, while in the South of Russia is, in our opinion, one of the highest priorities.

In a developing economy, the impetus for improving infrastructure and dispersing economic activity can be the development of a tourism cluster, which is a large independent intersectoral economic complex that does not lie in the usual vertical plane, but covers a certain horizontal space, including enterprises and organizations of different industry affiliation.

The main imperative for the development of the South Russian tourism cluster is the effectiveness of formal and informal mechanisms for bringing cluster members together, overcoming the fragmentation of the economy. Under the conditions of a cluster, the forms of networks are modified, going beyond hierarchical networks and turning into lattices of numerous overlapping and moving interconnections between cluster members. However, a study of the tourist and recreational sphere of the South of Russia shows that the links between firms and institutions existing in this area are poorly developed.

In this regard, the basis of the conceptual model for the development of the network structure of the South Russian clusters are:

Determining the form of participation in the development of a cluster of federal, regional and municipal authorities; improvement of transport, communication and other infrastructure; sponsoring forums to bring cluster members together; encouraging cluster-focused efforts to attract suppliers and providers from other regions; organization of a department coordinating the activities of the cluster members;

Consolidation of investment resources of its participants, formation of a data bank of investment projects and a data bank of potential investors;

Creation of a system of regional product marketing, which can be defined as a system of actions of cluster members, the purpose of which is to jointly promote the product of the region to the national and world markets.

14. At the heart of ensuring the prerequisites for sustainable development of the socio-economic systems of the regions of the South of Russia is the concept of “growth poles”, implemented in the form of creating an integrated, multi-level and multi-purpose system of special economic zones within the South Russian regions:

Special economic zones of tourist and recreational type. In the South of Russia, the territories of localization of such zones are the Krasnodar Territory (the city of Anapa, the city of Gelendzhik, the city of Sochi and the Tuapse municipal district) and the Stavropol Territory (the Caucasian Mineralnye Vody region). It is advisable to create such "growth points" in a number of other southern Russian regions (the Elbrus region - in the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic, "Dom-by-Teberda-Arkhyz" - in the Karachay-Cherkess Republic). In particular, the idea of ​​creating an ethnographic mountain village-aul based on the fullest possible use of the ethnocultural potential of these regions is seen as promising;

Complex zones that would combine the characteristics of a special tourist and recreational zone and a technology park;

Port zones, the creation of which, taking into account the strategic advantages of the transport component and geographical location the South of Russia, will accelerate the integration of the South Russian regions into the world economy, and will also allow the redistribution of world flows of goods and capital in their interests;

Entrepreneurial zones, which are used as an instrument of regional policy aimed at revitalizing small and medium-sized businesses in depressed areas, by providing the entrepreneur with great freedom of activity and significant financial benefits. It is advisable to develop such zones in the most backward South Russian regions with a high level of unemployment: the Republics of Ingushetia, Dagestan, Kalmykia;

Free warehouse as part of the national economic space, where a special system of benefits and incentives is used, which is not used in other parts of the country, which enables investors to receive higher profits;

Border economic cooperation zones enjoying tax and customs benefits.

15. In the current state of the Russian financial system, such new institutions of the regional investment and innovation system as the Investment and Development Agency (IDA) of the South of Russia, established in July 2005, act as the main mechanism for bringing financial resources to the real sector of the economy and ensuring an increase in investment activity. ., and a direct investment fund (PIF), established in September 2007. It should be noted that in Russia there is an earlier practice of creating such institutions. Thus, in March 2002, the Investment Development Fund of the Central Federal District was established, and in November 2004, the state non-profit organization Investment and Venture Fund of the Republic of Tatarstan was established. However, these structures were based on the model of budget-oriented funds, which is not acceptable for predominantly subsidized southern Russian regions. The new institutions of the regional investment and innovation system of the South of Russia are based on the model of public-private partnership, mainly between the federal executive authorities and large Russian banking capital. At the same time, the executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Federation that are part of the Southern Federal District are not sufficiently positioned as active participants in the investment process due to limited financial resources. One of the effective mechanisms for overcoming the current situation is, in our opinion, the use of a system of regional targeted loans for equity financing of investment projects with a high level of investment risks and transaction costs, a long payback period, as well as a significant excess of regional efficiency over the commercial efficiency of the project. At the same time, the regional authorities act as the issuer, and the role of the general agent is assigned to the direct investment fund of the South of Russia. Taking into account the investment and budgetary parameters of the southern Russian regions, it is proposed to use three borrowing schemes, the application of which can be carried out both integrated in the contours of a single loan, and individually in various models and types of borrowing.

The first scheme excludes the occurrence of financial flows at the first level of borrowings and assumes their occurrence at the time of redemption of debt securities. Within its framework, the transfer of funds is carried out directly from the direct investment fund of the South of Russia (general agent) of the company implementing the investment project.

The second scheme involves a direct transfer from the direct investment fund of the South of Russia (general agent) to the issuer through the purchase of debt obligations and their subsequent transfer on a competitive basis to borrowers under guaranteed obligations of the latter to finance investment projects.

The third scheme is a classic underwriting scheme, when debt obligations are redeemed by an underwriter (private investment fund) for subsequent placement among investors.

The main positive aspect of the proposed mechanism for attracting investments is that its implementation will contribute to the implementation of the principle of subsidiarity, reduce dependency tendencies in the regions, accelerate the transition of the socio-economic system of the region from a simple type of reproduction to an expanded one based on close interaction of all economic entities of the region, the introduction of scientific -technical developments and increasing the level of innovative activity.

2. Tax Code of the Russian Federation (as amended on 07.07.2003 No. 110-FZ) // Complete collection of codes of the Russian Federation. -M.: Omega-L, 2004.

3. Customs Code of the Russian Federation // Complete collection of codes of the Russian Federation. -M.: Omega-L, 2004.

4. Federal Law No. 115-FZ of June 23, 1995 “On State Forecasting and Programs for the Socio-Economic Development of the Russian Federation” // Russian newspaper. July 26, 1995.

5. Federal Law No. 7-FZ of January 10, 2000 “On Environmental Protection”.

6. Federal Law of the Russian Federation of July 22, 2005 No. 116-FZ “On Special Economic Zones in the Russian Federation” (as amended by Federal Laws of July 3, 2006 No. 76-FZ, of December 18, 2006 No. 232-F3).

7. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of April 1, 1996 No. 440 "On the Concept of the Russian Federation's transition to sustainable development" // Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation. 1996. No. 15.

8. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of May 13, 2000 No. 849 “On the Plenipotentiary Representative of the President of the Russian Federation in the Federal Districts”.

10. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 18, 1994 No. 1257 "On the regulation of issues of the creation and functioning of free economic zones in the Russian Federation."

11. Basic provisions of regional policy in the Russian Federation. (Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 3, 1996) // Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation. 1996. No. 23

12. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1112 "On additional financial support for depressed regions" of September 19, 1998

13. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 29, 1994 No. 1430 “On a special economic zone within the boundaries of a specially protected ecological resort region of the Russian Federation - Caucasian Mineral Waters”.

14. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 19, 1994 No. 740 “On the zone of economic favored nation in the territory of the Ingush Republic (as amended on May 5, June 29, 1995).

15. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 70 dated February 3, 2007 “On the Creation of a Special Economic Zone of Tourist and Recreational Type in the Krasnodar Territory”.

16. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 71 dated February 3, 2007 “On the establishment of a special economic zone of a tourist-recreational type on the territory of the Stavropol Territory”.

17. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 10, 1997 No. 1151 "On urgent measures to stabilize and develop the economy of the Republic of Dagestan."

18. Federal target program "Reducing differences in the socio-economic development of the regions of the Russian Federation (2002-2010 and up to 2015)"

19. Federal target program "South of Russia". Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 581 dated 08.08.01.

20. Federal target program "Ecology and natural resources of Russia (2002-2010)". Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 860 dated 07.12.01.

21. Federal target program "South of Russia (2008 2012)". Approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of January 14, 2008 No. 10 (as amended by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 02.06.2008 No. 423).

22. Order of the Plenipotentiary Representative of the President of the Russian Federation D.N. Kozak in the Southern Federal District dated October 15, 2004 No. 208.

23. Law of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic of May 19, 2008 No. 27-RZ “On the program of socio-economic development of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic for 2007-2011” Electronic resource. Access mode: http://base-i.consultant.ru/regbase/cgi7reqHiome

24. Law of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) "On Environmental Protection of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia)" dated December 25, 2003 No. 212-111.

25. Law of the Republic of Kabardino-Balkaria "On Environmental Protection" dated May 18, 1993 No. 1467 KhP-Z (as amended on 08.10.2003 No. 82-FZ).

27. The law of the Volgograd region "On the protection of the environment of the Volga-Akhtuba floodplain" of February 20, 1998 (as amended by the law of the Volgograd region of November 30, 2001 No. 636 OD).

28. Law of the Nizhny Novgorod Region dated September 10, 1996 No. 45-3 “On Environmental Safety”.

29. Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kalmykia dated August 25, 2005 No. 263 “On the program of socio-economic development of the Republic of Kalmykia for 2005-2012” Electronic resource. Access mode: blp://base-1.conszi11ap1.ry/ge§ba8e/c§1?gea=1ushe

30. Program of economic and social development of the Krasnodar Territory for 2003-2008. Approved by the Legislative Assembly of the Krasnodar Territory on November 8, 2003 // Kuban provincial journals. 2004. March 11.

31. Decree of the Head of the city of Yekaterinburg dated 31.07.97 No. 565 “On measures to reduce the harmful effects of vehicles on the environment of the city of Yekaterinburg”.

33. Decree of the Government of Moscow dated March 5, 2002 No. 152 “On the establishment of an investment development fund for the regions of the Central Federal District”.

34. Strategy for attracting investments of the Rostov region. Approved by the Decree of the Legislative Assembly of the Rostov Region dated June 28, 2004 No. 402 “On the Strategy for Attracting Investments in the Rostov Region”.

35. Abalkin L.I. Evolutionary economics in the system of rethinking the basic foundations of social science // Abalkin L.I. Selected works: In 4 vols. T. IV M .: Economics, 2000.

36. Adamescu A. The role of the first General scheme for the development and distribution of productive forces // The Economist. 2007. No. 3.

37. Aleksandrov V. Exports are getting more expensive, imports are getting cheaper // Economics and Life-South. 2003. No. 17.

38. Alexandrov E. Special zones in the world economy // Foreign economic activity. 1997. - No. 10.

39. Alisov A.N. Management of the development of the socially oriented economy of the region. M.: Publishing house "Prospect", 2004.

40. Altudov Yu.K., Ketova N.P. Investment potential of the South of Russia: analysis and development opportunities // Social and humanitarian knowledge. 2002. No. 4.

41. Amosov A. Issues of transition to an innovative type of reproduction // The Economist. 2008. No. 5.

42. Arend R. Sources of post-crisis economic growth in Russia // Issues of Economics. 2005. No. 1.

43. Arzhenovsky I.V. Regional market: reproduction aspect. - Nizhny Novgorod, 1997.

44. Arkhipov A., Pavlov P. Economic zones: advantages and disadvantages // The Economist. 2006. No. 11.

45. Afanasiev V.G. The problem of integrity in philosophy and biology. M.: Thought, 1984.

46. ​​Akhundov M.D. Concepts of space and time: origins, evolution, prospects. M., 1982.

47. Baikal Economic Forum 2002. Irkutsk September 17-20, 2002 // Bulletin of the Federation Council, 2003.

48. Baranov S., Skufina T. Dynamics of interregional differentiation in 1998-2005 // Federalism. 2005. No. 3.

49. Baranov S., Skufina T. Analysis of inter-regional differentiation and building ratings of subjects of the Russian Federation // Questions of Economics. 2005. No. 8.

50. Bell D. The third technological revolution and its possible socio-economic consequences. -M.: INION, 1990.

51. Bekov R.C. Spatio-temporal characteristics of the dynamics of the Russian economy / Nauch. ed. prof. T.I. Trubitsina. Volgograd: VolGU Publishing House, 2003.

52. Belozerov I.I., Belozerova C.V. Free economic zones as an element of regional investment policy // Collection of scientific works of SevKavGTU. Series "Economics". 2006. No. 4.

53. Belokrylova O.S., Usatiy P.S. Structural shifts in the regional economy. Publishing house: Rostov State University, 2003.

54. Belousov V.M. Economic processes in the Southern Federal District// Izvestiya vuzov. North Caucasian region. Social Sciences. 2002. No. 3.

55. Bereznev C.B. Stabilization of the regional economy and its sustainable development (on the example of the Kemerovo region): Abstract of the thesis. . Doctor of Economics -Tomsk, 2001.

56. Blam I.Yu. Sustainable Development: Main Theoretical Problems // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2000. No. 2.

57. Brodskaya T.G. Balance of regional reproduction. L.: Izd-vo LFEI, 1990.

58. Buzgalin A.V., Kolganov A.I. global capital. M.: Publishing house URSS, 2004.

59. Budget federalism: problems, theory, experience. Moscow: Russian-Canadian Consortium for Applied Economic Research, 2001.

60. Wallerstein I. Analysis of world systems and the situation in modern world. -M.: Progress, 2001.

61. Relationship public policy sustainable development and taxation / Ed. T.V. Ignatova. Rostov-on-Don: SKAGS Publishing House, 2003.

62. Wozniak V.Ya. Social development and ecology: relationship, contradictions, crises // Questions of Economics. 1995. No. 2.

63. Volkova V.N., Denisov A.A. Fundamentals of systems theory and system analysis. -SPb., 1999.

64. Volovich V.N. The impact of scientific and technological progress on the relationship between man and the natural environment. In: Ecological imperatives of Russia's sustainable development. - S.-Pb.: Petropolis, 1996.

65. Galayda V.A. Globalization and regulation of the network economy in modern macroeconomic systems: dis. . Dr. Econ. Sciences. M., 2006.

66. Gaponenko A. L. Strategy of socio-economic development: country, region, city. M.: Publishing House of the RAGS, 2001.

67. Gershkovich B.Ya. The need to mitigate the asymmetry of economic and social development of the South of Russia // Economics of regional development: problems, searches, prospects: Yearbook. Issue 2. - Volgograd: VolGU Publishing House, 2002.

68. Gilfason T. Nature, energy and economic growth // HSE Economic Journal. 2001. Volume 5. No. 4.

69. Glazyrina I.P. Natural capital in the economy in transition. -M.: NIA-Priroda, REFIA, 2001.

70. Gorshkov V.G. Energy of the biosphere and sustainability of the state of the environment // Itogi nauki i tekhniki (VINITI). Ser. "Theoretical and general questions of geography". T.7. -M., 1990.

71. Gokhberg L.M. science statistics. M.: TEIS, 2003.

72. Granberg A.G. Regional economy and regional science in Russia: ten years later // Region: economics and sociology. 2004. No. 1.

73. Grinberg R. Russian structural policy: between inevitability and uncertainty // Issues of Economics. 2008. No. 3.

74. Group of eight in numbers: Stat.sb. / Federal State Statistics Service. M., 2004.

75. Grünbaum F. Philosophical problems of space and time. Per from English. M., 1969.

76. Gubaidullina T.N. Sustainable development of the ecological and economic system: questions of theory and methodology. Kazan: Publishing house of KSU, 2000.

77. Gudenitsa I.N. Globalization and its impact on the implementation of the strategy of economic development of the mesolevel: Ph.D. diss. . Candidate of Economic Sciences - Rostov n / a, 2005.

78. Guzev M.M., Muratkina V.V. Regionalization in the light of the formation of a new model of Russian federalism: (Political and economic aspect) // Vestnik VolGU. Ser. 3, Economy. Ecology. 1999. Issue 4.

79. Guriev S., Sonin K. Economics of the "resource curse" // Questions of Economics. 2008. No. 4.

80. Gurieva L. Southern Federal District: Development Issues // The Economist. 2005. No. 11.

81. Gusarov Yu.V. Management: the dynamics of non-equilibrium. M.: CJSC Publishing House Economics, 2003.

82. Danilov-Danilyan V. New ethics is a prerequisite for responding to the environmental challenge // Green world. 1999. No. 6. S. 15.

83. Danilov-Danilyan V.I., Losev K.S., Reif I.E. Before the main challenge of civilization. View from Russia. M.: INFRA-M, 2005.

84. Dedov L.A. Development of economic systems: methods of evaluation and analysis. - Yekaterinburg: Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1998.

85. Demidov V.A., Lebedeva H.H., Oleinik O.S. Regional innovation system: potential and development trends. - Volgograd: VolGU Publishing House, 2008.

86. Report “On the state of nature management and environmental protection of the Krasnodar Territory in 2003” / Main Directorate of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia for the Krasnodar Territory. Krasnodar, 2004.

87. Report on the progress of work on the federal target program and the effectiveness of the use of funds for its implementation. Administration of the CMS, 1997.

88. Long-term forecasting of the territorial economic development of Russia. Methodological foundations and forecast for the period up to 2015 / Ed. B.M. Shtulberg. -M.: SOPS, 2002.

89. Druzhinin A.G. South of Russia at the end of the XX beginning of the XXI century. (economic and geographical aspects). - Rostov n / D: Rost Publishing House, University, 2005.

90. Druzhinin A.G., Ionov A.Ch. Conceptual foundations of the regionalization of the economy. Rostov n / a: Publishing House of the SKNTs VSH, 2001.

91. Druzhinin A.G. South Russian regionogenesis: factors, trends, stages // Scientific Thought of the Caucasus. 2000. No. 2.

92. Dumova I.I. Socio-economic bases of environmental management in the region. Novosibirsk: "Science", 1996.

93. Evgrashin A. From the practice of French indicative planning //Russian Economic Journal. 1998. No. 2.

94. Ershov Yu.S., Ibragimov N.M., Melnikova JI.B. Federal Districts of Russia: Features of the Development of the Economy and the Social Sphere // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2006. No. 4.

95. Zhikharevich B.S. Modern economic policy of city and regional authorities. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of ISEP RAN, 1995.

96. Zhikharevich B.S. Methods of formation and mechanisms for the implementation of local economic policy: author. dis. . Dr. Econ. Sciences. SPb., 1996.

97. Zemlyanukhin S.G., N.S. Zemlyanukhin, B.JI. Sidnin et al. Ensuring the sustainable development of the Russian socio-economic system. Saratov: Saratov State University. tech. un-t, 2002.

98. Zimenkov R.I. Free economic zones. M.: UNITI-DANA, 2005.

99. Zolotarev B.C., Chernenko O.B. Industry of the South of Russia: problems and preconditions for revival // Izvestiya vuzov. North Caucasian region. Social Sciences. 2002. No. 3.

100. Ivanov N.P., Rozhkov O.P. Sectoral priorities of industrial development of the region // Izvestiya vuzov. North Caucasian region. Social Sciences. 2002. No. 3.

101. Ivanov N.P., Stekhina S.N. Regional aspects of economic growth and the definition of targets for sustainable socio-economic development of the Stavropol Territory // Izvestiya vuzov. North Caucasus region. Social Sciences. 2002. No. 2.

102. Ignatov V.G., Kokin A.V. Ecology and economics of nature management. Rostov-on-Don: "Phoenix", 2003.

103. Ignatov V.G., Butov V.I. South of Russia. Rostov n / a.: Publishing house SKAGS, 2005.

104. Ignatov V.G., Butov V.I. Southern Russia and its regions. M.: ICC "Mart"; Rostov n / a: Publishing Center "Mart", 2006.

105. Izard U. Methods of regional analysis: an introduction to the science of regions. -M.: Progress, 1966.

106. Ilyinsky I.M. Educational revolution. M., 2002.

107. Indicators of sustainable development of Russia (environmental and economic aspects) / Ed. S.N. Bobyleva, P.A. Makeenko. M.: TsPRP, 2001.

108. Intriligator M. The Russian economy still needs structural reforms // Problems of theory and practice of management. 2004. No. 3.

109. Inshakov O.V. On new methodological approaches in strategic planning for the development of Russia's macro-regions. - Economics of regional development: problems, searches, prospects: Yearbook. Issue 4. Volgograd: VolGU Publishing House, 2004.

110. Inshakov O.V. On the development strategy of the Southern macro-region of Russia. -Volgograd: Publishing House of VolGU, 2003.

111. Inshakov O.V. Economic genetics and nanoeconomics. Volgograd: VolGU Publishing House, 2007.

112. Cuddy M. Experience of the theory and policy of regional development: an example for Russia? // Post-communist Russia in the context of global socio-economic development. Materials of the international conference. Moscow: Institute for the Economy in Transition, 2001.

113. Kadochnikov P., Sinelnikov-Murylev S., Trunin I., Chetverikov S. Redistribution of regional incomes within the framework of the system of interbudgetary relations in Russia // Questions of Economics. 2003. No. 10.

114. Karkhova I.Yu., Kunakov D.A. Special Economic Zones as a Tool to Improve Competitiveness and Diversify the National Economy // Russian Foreign Economic Bulletin. 2007. No. 9.

115. Kerashev A.A. Integration-reproduction paradigm of managing the economic complex of the macroregion: dis. . Doctor of Economics - Maikop, 2005.

116. Kirdina S. Institutional structure of modern Russia: evolutionary modernization // Questions of Economics. 2004. No. 10.

117. Kiseleva H.H., Doroshenko O.N. Socio-economic differentiation and stimulation of the development of problem regions of the Southern Federal District. Rostov-on-Don - Pyatigorsk: SKAGS Publishing House, 2004.

118. Kiseleva H.H. Socio-economic effect of the involvement of the subjects of the Southern Federal District in international trade // Economic Bulletin of the Rostov State University. 2005. No. 3.

119. Kiseleva H.H. Trajectories of changes in the territorial system of economy // Philosophy of economy. Almanac of the Center for Social Sciences and the Faculty of Economics of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. 2005. No. 3.

120. Kiseleva H.H. Socio-economic effect of the involvement of the subjects of the Southern Federal District in international trade. Izvestiya Vysshikh educational institutions. North Caucasian region. 2006. No. 4.

121. Kiseleva H.H. Ethno-economic component of the systemic organization of the South of Russia // Successes of modern natural science. 2007. No. 11.

122. Kiseleva H.H. Cyclical fluctuations in the sectoral structure of the Southern Federal District // Economic Bulletin of the Russian State University. 2006. No. 2.

123. Kiselev H.H., Kiselev V.V. Regional paradigm of sustainable development of the socio-economic system of the region // Successes of modern natural science. 2007. No. 11.

124. Kiseleva H.H., Khubulova V.V. Management of meta-regional socio-economic proportions // Economic Bulletin of the Russian State University. 2007. No. 2. 4.2.

125. Kleiner G.B. The evolution of institutional systems. M.: Nauka, 2004.

126. Klimova N.I. Scientific foundations of investment support for regional development: Abstract of the thesis. dis. Dr. Econ. Sciences. Yekaterinburg, 1999.

127. Klistorin V.I. Spatial Economics and Regional Studies: Unsolved Problems // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2007. No. 1.

128. Klistorin V.I. Quality of economic growth and regional development // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2006. No. 3.

129. Klyuev H.H. Ecological results of reforming Russia // www.ecolife.ru

130. Knyaginin V.N., Shedrovitsky P.G. Industrial policy of Russia: who will pay the costs of globalization / Ser.: Ideologies. M.: Europe, 2005.

131. Knyaginin V., Perelygin Yu. Spatial development of the country in the long term // Russian Expert Review. 2007. - No. 12.

132. Kovaleva I.V. Agro-industrial cluster as a strategy for improving economic relations in the agro-industrial complex // International Agricultural Journal. 2008. No. 2.

133. Kolesnikov Yu.S. Ethnoeconomics in the fate of the modernization of the South of Russia // Economic Bulletin of the Rostov State University. 2003. Vol. 1. No. 2.

134. Kolesnikov Yu.S. Multistructural nature of the national economy of ethnoeconomy and the processes of its modernization // Ethnoeconomics of the South of Russia: concepts, parameters, mechanisms (materials of the All-Russian Scientific Conference). settlement Dombay, 2005.

135. Commoner B. Closing circle. L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1974.

136. Kondratiev N.D. Large conjuncture cycles and the theory of foresight. Selected works. -M.: CJSC "Publishing House" Economics ", 2002.

137. Konev Yu.M., Legostaev A.V., Problems of legislative support of regional policy // Collection of reports “Methods for substantiating the prospects for the development of regions” .- M .: SOPS, 2004.

138. Kostyuk V.N. Non-stationary economic processes. M.: Editorial URSS, 2004.

139. Kochetov E. Geoeconomic atlas of the world (the latest configuration of the global space) // Society and Economics. 1999. No. 7-8.

140. Christensen K.M. The innovator's dilemma. Per. from English. Moscow: Alpina Business Books, 2004.

141. Kuznetsova O.V. Economic development of regions: theoretical and practical aspects of state regulation. M.: Editorial URSS, 2002. S.ZO.

142. Kuzbozhev E.N., Samofalova E.V. Management of the structural dynamics of the regional economy. Kursk, 2003.

143. Kuzyk B., Yakovets Yu. Alternatives of structural dynamics // The Economist. 2007. No. 1.

144. Kurnysheva I.R. Macroeconomic development: trends and prospects. Moscow: Nauka, 2005.

145. Kuznetsov N.I. Theoretical substantiation of the priority development of the agro-industrial complex as part of the Russian economy: author. dis. . .d-ra economics. Sciences. Saratov, 2005.

146. Lavrovsky B.L. Territorial differentiation and approaches to its weakening in the Russian Federation // HSE Economic Journal. 2003. No. 4.

147. Lavrovsky B., Postnikova E. Transfer mechanism: has the crisis been overcome? // Issues of Economics. 2005. No. 8.

148. Larina N.I. Regional clusters and territorial production complexes as forms of territorial organization of production // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2007. No. 4.

149. Lebedeva H.H. The institutional mechanism of the economy and its transformation in Russia: dis. . Dr. Econ. Sciences. Volgograd, 2002.

150. Leksin V., Shvetsov A. All-Russian reforms and territorial development // Russian Economic Journal. 2004. No. 4-12.

151. Leksin V. "The economy of doubling" and its territorial consequences // Federalism. 2005. No. 3.

152. Lemeshev M.Ya. Ecological and economic assessment of NTP // Questions of Economics. 1987. No. 3.

153. Leontiev V. Economic Essays. Theories, research, facts and politics. M., 1990.

154. Lesh A. Geographical location of the economy. M.: Izd-vo inostr. lit., 1959.

155. Litovka O., Dedov L., Pavlov K., Fedorov M. The law of biosphere-compatible equilibrium of natural-anthropogenic systems // Society and Economics. 2004. No. 5-6.

156. Lomovtseva O.A. Reproduction of the regional socio-natural economic system: dis. . Doctor of Economics Volgograd, 1999.

157. Losev K.S. Environmental problems and prospects for Russia's sustainable development in the 21st century. M.: Komosinform, 2001.

158. Lysenko V. The development of federal districts and the future of the federal structure of Russia // Federalism. 2002. No. 3.

159. Lyubimtseva S. Laws of structural evolution of economic systems // The Economist. 2003. No. 2.

160. Malashihina H.H. Risk management in the agricultural sector as a factor in the sustainable development of the region. Rostov n / D .: Publishing house Rost.un-ta, 2003.

161. Malashihina H.H., Kiselev V.V. Methodological tools for monitoring the sustainability of regional development // Sustainable development of the South of Russia: state and prospects / Ed. Ed. Ignatov V.G. Rostov n / a.: Publishing house SKAGS, 2003.

162. Mamedov O.Yu. Mixed economy. Two sector model. Rostov n / a: Phoenix Publishing House, 2001.

163. Margolin A.M., Khutyz Z.A. Theory and practice of investment support for the development of the economy of depressed regions. M.: NTsSiMO, 2004.

164. Markova H., Monakhova T. Regional policy as a factor in the sustainable development of the Russian economy // Federalism. 2004. No. 2.

165. Marx K. Capital. T. 1. M .: Political literature, 1951.

166. Marx K., Engels F. Op. 2nd ed. T.23.

168. May V., Yanovsky K. Political and legal factors of economic growth in Russian regions // Issues of Economics. 2001. No. 11.

169. Meadows JI.X., Meadows D.L., Randers I. Beyond Growth. Moscow: Progress, 1994.

170. Menshikov S.M., Klimenko L.A. Long waves in the economy. Moscow: International relations, 1989.

171. Melnikov R. Federal regional economic policy: strategic alternatives and ways of implementation // Federalism. 2006. No. 2.

172. Milenin V.G., Zverev M.Yu., Odarich C.V. The impact of the accession of the Russian Federation to the World Trade Organization on the economy of the Stavropol Territory. Stavropol: Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the Stavropol Territory, 2004.

173. Minakir P.A. Economic development of the region: program approach. -M.: Nauka, 1983.

174. Modeling the socio-ecological-economic system of the region / Ed. IN AND. Gurman, E.V. Ryumina. M.: Nauka, 2003.

175. Mostepanenko A.M. The problem of the universality of space and time.-L., 1969.

176. Myrdal G. Contemporary Issues"Third World" (Asian Drama). -M.: Progress, 1972.

177. Naryshkin S. Special economic zones in the system of attracting foreign investment in Russia // Federalism. 2006. No. 4.

178. Our common future. Report of the International Commission on Environment and Development (ICED). Moscow: Progress, 1989.

179. Hop A.B., Bogotov X.J1. Ecological culture of society: problems of economic theory and economic practice. Nalchik, 1997.

180. Ovchinnikov V.N. Cyclic growth and ethnoeconomics in the context of modernization // Ethnoeconomics in the modernization paradigm of the development of the national economy: sustainability resources and adaptability reserves. Rostov-on-Don, 2004.

181. Ovchinnikov V.N. Lessons and problems in implementing the development strategy of the South of Russia // Economic Bulletin of the Rostov State University. 2003. Vol. 1. No. 1.

182. Odum G., Odum E. Energy basis of man and nature. Moscow: Progress, 1997.

183. Oleinikova I.N. Reproductive process in the system of regional economy: innovation component and management mechanism (structural aspect). Rostov n/a: Terra, 2004.

184. Oreshenkov A. Integrated production chains and the practice of their creation // The Economist. 2006. No. 11.

185. Osipov Yu.M. Theory of economy. T. III. M., 1998.

186. Osipov Yu.M. The time of economic philosophy. M.: Economist, 2003.

187. Main indicators of environmental protection: Stat. Bulletin / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2003.

188. Main indicators of environmental protection: Stat. bulletin / Rosstat.-M., 2004.

189. Main indicators of environmental protection: Stat. Bulletin / Rosstat.-M., 2005.

190. Pavlenko F., Novitsky V. Trends in structural changes and industrial policy in the CIS countries // Questions of Economics. 1999. No. 1.

191. Pavlov P.V. Free economic zones in the development of the national economy. Taganrog: TIUE, 2005.

192. Pankrukhin A.P. Territory marketing. M. : Publishing House of the RAGS, 2002.

193. Pantin V.I. Waves and cycles of social development: civilizational dynamics and modernization. M.: Nauka, 2004.

194. Penkov V.F. Political stability as a factor in the sustainable development of Russia and its regions // Sustainable development of the South of Russia: state and prospects / Ed. Ed. Ignatov V.G. Rostov n / a.: Publishing house SKAGS, 2003.

195. Polynev A. Interregional economic differentiation: methodology of analysis and state regulation. M.: Editorial URSS, 2003.

196. Popov V.P., Krainyuchenko I.V. Global evolutionism and synergetics of the noosphere. Rostov n / a: Publishing House of the SKNTs VSH, 2003.

197. Porter M. Competition.: Per. from English. M .: Publishing house "William", 2005.

198. Postnikova E.A., Shiltsin E.A. Features of the balance of Russian regions // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2007. No. 2.

199. Prigogine I., Stengers I. Order out of chaos. Moscow: Progress, 1986.

200. The problem of sustainable development of Russia in the light of the scientific heritage of V.I. Vernadsky: Collection of reports. M.: Non-Governmental Ecofund, 1997.

201. Draft long-term concept of socio-economic development of the Russian Federation until 2020 Electronic resource. Access mode http://www. economy. gov.ru

202. Draft concept of the strategy for the socio-economic development of the regions of the Russian Federation, proposed by the Ministry of Regional Development of the Russian Federation in 2005. Electronic resource. Access mode http://www.minregion.ru/Workltems/

203. Industry of Russia. 2005: Stat.sb. / Rosstat. M., 2006.

204. Psychomakhov Kh.M. Expanded reproduction of labor potential as a condition for sustainable development of the region: dis. . Dr. Econ. Sciences. M., 2005.

205. Pchelintsev O.S. Regional economy in the system of sustainable development. M.: Nauka, 2004.

206. Pchelintsev O., Minchenko M. Regional conditions and problems of economic growth // Federalism. 2005. No. 1.

207. Pylneva T.G. Improving the management of regional eco-economic systems (theory and practice): author. dis. . Candidate of Economic Sciences M., 2002.

208. Rayskaya N., Frenkel A., Chubakov G. Investment heterogeneity of Russian regions // Federalism. 2006. No. 4.

209. Regional economy / Ed. Kuznetsova N.G., Tyaglova S.G. Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2001.

210. Regional problems of the transitional economy / Under the editorship of V.G. Aliyev. -M., 2002.

211. Regional economy / Ed. Kuznetsova N.G., Tyaglova S.G. Rostov n/a: Phoenix, 2001.

212. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2002: Stat.sb. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2002.

213. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2003: Stat. Sat. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2003.

214. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2004: Stat. Sat. / Rosstat. M., 2004.

215. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2005: Stat. Sat. / Rosstat. M., 2006.

216. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2006: Stat. Sat. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2007.

217. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2007: Stat. Sat. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2007.

219. Russian North: strategic quality of management / Ed. Yu.P. Alekseev and A.N. Alisova. M.: Tydex Ko LLC, 2004.

220. Rybakov F.F., Chistobaev A.I., Shkonda K.V. North-West of Russia: a thorny path to the market. St. Petersburg: OTSiEM, 2002.

221. Rybakov F.F., Asadulaev A.B. Territorial structure of Russia: new approaches. St. Petersburg: OTSiEM, 2002.

222. Sagdiev M.A. Management of integrated formations in the agro-industrial complex: experience and ways of improvement. M.: Publishing House of the Moscow Agricultural Academy, 2004.

223. Sansyzbaev S.N. Strategy for the socio-economic development of the region in the transitive economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan: Abstract of the thesis. dis. Dr. Econ. Sciences. St. Petersburg, 2000.

224. Sapozhnikov A.D., Smolnikov M.V., Vasiliev V.A. Bourgeois regional theory and state regulation of the distribution of productive forces. M.: Thought, 1981.

225. Seliverstov V.E. Regional policy of Russia: the choice of a new model // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2006. No. 4.

226. Sergienko Ya., Frenkel A. Venture investment and innovation activity // Issues of Economics. 2006. No. 5.

227. Skufina T., Baranov S. Regional development of Russia in the light of cyclic-wave ideas // Federalism. 2007. No. 1.

228. Slavvitskaya I.I. Institutional and economic conditions for the formation of relations of regional reproduction: PhD thesis in economics. - Mines, 2006.

229. Smolnitsky V.A. Structural policy as a system-forming function of state regulation of the economy: Ph.D. dis. . cand.economy Rostov n / D., 2003.

230. Improving the management system of the regional socio-economic system: Monograph / Ed. E.N. Kuzbozheva, A.B. Evchenko. Kursk, 2003.

231. Sorokin D. Reproductive sector of the Russian economy: 1999 -2007 // Issues of Economics. 2008. No. 4.

232. Socio-economic situation in the Southern Federal District in 2006: Stat.sb./Rosstat. M., 2007.

233. Social indicators in the system of scientific and technical policy / Sat. translations from English -M.: Progress, 1986.

234. Stiglitz J. Globalization: alarming trends. M.: Publishing House "Thought", 2003.

235. Strategies for Russia's Macroregions: Methodological Approaches, Priorities and Ways of Implementation, Ed. A.G. Granberg. M.: Nauka, 2004.

236. Strategy and Problems of Russia's Sustainable Development in the 21st Century, Ed. A.G. Granberg, V.I. Danilova-Danilyana, M.M. Tsikanova, E.S. Shopkhoev. M.: Economics, 2002.

237. Stukach V., Mozzherina T. Cluster approach to the development of investment processes in the agro-industrial complex // Agricultural Economics of Russia. 2006. No. 11.

238. Surinov A.E. The standard of living of the population of Russia: 1992 20002 (according to official statistical observations). - M.: IIC "Statistics of Russia", 2003.

239. Suspicin S.A. Potentials and Limitations of Spatial Transformations in the Russian Economy // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2004. No. 4.

240. Suspicin S.A. Indicators of the position of regions in 2004 // Region: economics and sociology. 2005. No. 2.

241. Suspicin S.A. Spatial Transformations of the Russian Economy in Contrasting Scenarios of Its Development: Statement of the Problem and Empirical Estimates // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2006. No. 1.

242. Suspicin S.A. Development of methods for measuring spatial transformations of the economy // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2007. No. 4.

243. Sutyagin B.C. On the ratio of scientific forecasts and state programs of socio-economic development // Problems of Forecasting. 1998. No. I.

244. Tambiev A.Kh. Region in the system of national economy: economic models and mechanisms of regulation: diss. . Doctor of Economics Rostov n / D., 2000.

245. Tatarkin A.I., Lvov D.S., Kuklin A.A., Myzin A.L., Bogatyrev L.L., Korobitsin B.A., Yakovlev V.I. Modeling of sustainable development as a condition for increasing the economic security of the territory. Yekaterinburg: Publishing house of Ural.un-ta, 1999.

246. Tatarkin A.I., Zorkova H.A. Problems of optimizing the sectoral and geographical structure of the export activity of the region. Preprint. - Yekaterinburg: Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2000.

247. Tatarkin A.I. Formation of competitive advantages of regions // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2006. No. 1.

248. Tatarkin A., Zakharchuk E., Pasynkov A. Optimization of the financial security of territories using mathematical theories of sustainability // Federalism. 2007. No. 4.

249. Territorial strategic planning in the transition to a market economy: the experience of Russian cities / Ed. ed. S.A. Vasiliev. - St. Petersburg: SE MTsSEI "Leontief Center", 2003.

250. Todaro M.P. Economic development. M., 1997.

251. Thomas V., Dailami M., Dhareshwar A. et al. Growth quality. M .: Publishing house "The whole world", 2001.

252. Turchaiovsky D. Development banks as an instrument of investment policy // The Economist. 2006. No. 11.

253. Fedorova T.A. Region in the system of a single national economic complex. L .: Publishing house of Leningrad State University, 1981.

254. Fedotov A.P. Planet Earth, humanity, economy // The Economist. 1995. No. 11.

255. Folomeev A.N., Revazov V.G. Innovative investment. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2001.

256. Harrod R. On the theory of economic dynamics. M.: Economics, 1999.

258. Hall A. Methodology experience for systems engineering. M., 1975.

259. Khramova I.Yu. Patterns of creating an economic mechanism for nature management in the conditions of market relations (on the example of using the financial and credit system): author. dis. .c.e.s. - Nizhny Novgorod, 1998.

260. Chepasova E. Structural adjustment and the quality of growth // The Economist. 2005. No. 3.

261. Chernoy L. On the materialization of innovation // The Economist. 2007. No. 3.

262. Shandirov M.O. Ethno-economics in the system of regional reproduction (based on the materials of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic): dis. . cand. economy Sciences. Rostov n / a, 2003.

263. Shvetsov A. Decentralization of federal regional policy // Federalism. 2006. No. 4.

264. Shvetsov A.N. Traditional centralism or new regionalism: approaches to ensuring territorial development // Region: Economics and Sociology. 2007. No. 1.

265. Shevchenko I.V., Aleksandrova E.N., Aleksandrov A.V. Southern Federal District: what is beyond the horizon? // Regional economy: theory and practice. 2004. No. 1 (4).

266. Shniper R.I. Region: diagnostics and forecasting. Novosibirsk: IEOPP SB RAS, 1996.

267. Schumpeter J. Theory of economic development (Research of entrepreneurial profit, capital, credit, interest and business cycle). Per. with him. -M.: Progress, 1982.

268. Economic encyclopedia. Political economy (in 4 volumes). T.4. -M.: Soviet Encyclopedia, 1980.

269. Economic development of modern Russia: monograph / Ed. N.V. Yaremchuk. M.: Premiere, 2005.

270. Endres A., Kverner I. Economics of natural resources. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2004.

271. Yakovets Yu.V. cycles. A crisis. Forecasts. Moscow: Nauka, 1999.

272. Yangirov A., Yusupov K. Interpotential relationships in the analysis of the reproductive potential of the regions of the Russian Federation // Federalism. 2007. No. 3.

273. Yasin E.G. Structure of the Russian Economy and Structural Policy: Challenges of Globalization and Modernization. M.: Ed. GU HSE house, 2008.

274. Aoki M. Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis. MIT Press, 1999.

275. Barbier E.B., Marcandya A. The Conditions for Achieving Environmentally Sustainable Growth // European Economic Review, 1990. No. 34. P.659-669.

276. Bell D. The Coming of Post Industriae Society. Venture in Social Forecasting.-N.-Y., 1973.

277. Berrens R.P. Implementing the Safe Minimum Standards Aproach // Land Economics Vol.74, 1998, p. 147-161.

278. Black B.S., Gison R.J. Venture Capital and the Structure of Capital Markets: Banks versus Stock Markets // Journal of Financial Economics. 1998 Vol. 47. No 3. P.243-277.

279. Borts G.H., Stein J.L. Economic Growth in a Free Market. New York, London, 1964.

280. Brock W., Hsieh D.A., Le-Baron B.D. Nonlinear Dynamics, Chaos and Instability: Statistical Theory and Economic Evidence. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1991.

281. Daly H. Allocation, Distribution and Scale: Towards an Economy that is Efficient, just, and Sustainable // Ecological Economics, 1992. No. 6. P. 185-193.

282. Doeringer B., Tekla D.G. Business Strategy and Cross-Industry Clusters // Economic Development Quarterly, vol. 9, no 3, 1995, p.225-237/

283. Englmann F., Walz U. Industrial Clusters and Regional Growth in the Presence of Local Inputs // Journal of Regional Science, vol. 35, 1995, p.3-27.

284. Farmer M.C., Randall A. The Rationality of a Safe Minimum Standard // Land Economics Vol.74, 1998, p.287-302.

285. Green Accounting in Europe Four Case Studies / ed. by A. Markandya and M. Pavan, London, 1999.

286. Hacansson H. International Marketing and Purchsing of Industrial Goods. -Chichester: Wiley, 1982.

287. Hartwick J.M. Intergenerational Equity and Investing of Rents from Exhaustible Resources // American Economic Rewiew, 1977, vol.67.

288. Indicators of Sustainable Development: Framework and Methodology. -N.Y.: United Nations, 1996. 428 p.

289. Kydland F., Prescott E. Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations // Eco-nometrica, 1982, vol. fifty.

290. Lerner J. The Syndication of Venture Capital Investments // Financial Management. 1994 Vol. 23.

291. Matsson L. G. Management of strategic change in a “Markets as Networks” Perspective // ​​The Management of Strategic. - Oxford: Blackwell, 1987.

292. Medio A. Chaotic Dynamics. Theory and Applications to Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992.

293. Myrdal G. Economic Theory and Under-developed Regions. London, 1957.

294. Peters E. Chaos and Order in the Capital Markets. New York, 1991.

295. Prescott E. Theory Ahead of Business-Cycle Measurement // Carnegie Rochester Series on Public Policy, 1986, vol. 25, Autumn.

296. Rennings K., Hubert W. Steps towards indicators of sustainable development // Ecological economics, 1997, no. 6.

297. Richardson H.W. Regional Growth Theory. London, 1973.

298. Robertson P.L., Langlois R.N. Innovation, Network, and Vertical Integration //Research Policy. January. 1994. P. 12-13.

299. Siebert H. Regional Economic Growth: Theory and Policy. Scranton, 1969.

300. Solow R.M. Intergenerational Equity and Exhaustible Resources // Review of Economic Studies, Symposium Issue, 1974.

301. Stiglitz J.E. Growth with Exhaustible Natural Resources: Efficient and Optimal Growth Paths // Review of Economic Studies, Symposium Issue, 1974.

302. Weizsaecker E. U. von., Lovins A. B., Lovins L. H. Factor Four. Doubling Wealth Havin Resource Use. A report to the Club of Rome. - London: Earth-scan, 1997.-322 p.

303. Vaga T. Profiting from Chaos Theory for Market Timing, Stock Selection and Option Valuation. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1994.

304. Von Hippel E. Successful industrial products from customer ideas // Journal of Marketing, no 42, 1978.1. Table 1 continued

305. Kalmykia 1.85 4.51 2.28 1.56

306. KChR 0.62 4.14 1.43 0.98 1.77

307. Sev. Ossetia 0.44 4.11 1.51 0.86 1.73 0.82

308. Krasnodar region 1.82 4.41 2.52 1.51 0.95 1.64 1.71

309. Stavropol region 0.71 4.04 1.62 0.64 1.37 0.77 0.68 1.24

310. Astrakhan region 1.70 4.49 2.46 1.50 1.27 1.57 1.59 0.55 1.12

311. Volgograd region 1.41 4.15 2.23 1.37 1.85 1.22 1.38 1.27 1.02 1.10

312. Rostov region 1.41 3.87 2.20 1.22 1.99 1.14 1.37 1.36 1.08 1.23 0.74

313. SFD 1.03 3.95 1.83 0.77 1.35 0.87 0.97 0.98 0.47 0.90 0.81 0.73

314 RF 2.73 4.26 3.36 2.46 2.36 2.44 2.65 1.70 2.33 1.92 1.79 1.74 1.96 1.88 1. Ingushetia 1.43 2.01 1. KBR 1.13 1.22 1.58

315. Kalmykia 1.69 2.36 2.14 1.81

316. KChR 0.64 1.78 1.45 1.06 1.61

317. Sev. Ossetia 0.38 1.86 1.60 1.07 1.61 0.81

318. Krasnodar region 1.74 2.54 2.54 1.59 1.89 1.68 1.66

319. Stavropol region 1.09 1.47 1.90 0.71 1.89 1.05 1.04 1.21

320. Astrakhan region 2.05 2.83 2.90 1.99 2.21 2.03 2.00 0.65 1.56

321. Volgograd region 1.54 2.39 2.41 1.67 2.18 1.41 1.55 1.14 1.17 1.39

322. Rostov region 1.57 2.13 2.40 1.41 1.70 1.29 1.53 1.15 1.15 1.48 0.92

323. SFD 1.09 1.83 1.90 0.92 1.61 0.95 1.04 0.89 0.59 1.28 0.90 0.75

324 RF 3.27 3.52 4.01 3.09 2.93 3.08 3.19 2.09 2.62 2.20 2.13 2.12 2.45