Sectoral and territorial specifics of value-added chains in Russia: the input-output approach

Автор: Lukin Evgenii V.

Журнал: Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast @volnc-esc-en

Рубрика: Branch-wise economy

Статья в выпуске: 6 (66) т.12, 2019 года.

Бесплатный доступ

This paper shows the growing role of domestic demand in the development of the modern economy. We consider the capacity of domestic markets of the largest countries of the world. We prove that the low volume of domestic demand inhibits economic dynamics and worsens the quality of socio-economic development of the Russian Federation. We consider that a promising direction for expanding domestic consumer and investment demand is the implementation of state policy to increase the incomes of the population, companies and the state in the framework of lengthening their own value-added chains that produce goods and services for final use. In this regard, the goal of this study is to analyze the existing value-added chains, assess the degree of their fragmentation, sectoral and territorial specifics. The input-output theory serves as a methodological basis for our study. The information source is represented by basic input-output tables and the data of the Unified Interdepartmental Statistical Information System. The novelty of the research consists in adjusting the multidisciplinary approach to the assessment of fragmentation of production to suit the needs of the regional level and in identifying modern patterns in the functioning of Russian value-added chains on the basis of the approbation of the approach on the materials of Russian regions. According to the results of the calculations we reveal the average position of 125 branches of the Russian economy in the supply and sales chains. We substantiate the degree of fragmentation of production chains of various industries; we substantiate the factors that determine the length of a production process. We calculate the average distance along the sales chain, which the goods cover to the moment of their use by the end consumer. We consider regional fragmentation of production in Russia. We reveal a number of statistically significant dependencies between the position of regions in the value-added chains and their socio-economic development performance.


Value-added chains, input-output tables, fragmentation of production, length of the production chain, distance to the end user

Короткий адрес:

IDR: 147224227   |   DOI: 10.15838/esc.2019.6.66.7

Список литературы Sectoral and territorial specifics of value-added chains in Russia: the input-output approach

  • Granberg A.G. Osnovy regional'noi ekonomiki [Basics of regional economy]. Moscow: GU HSE, 2004. 495 p.
  • Gubanov S. Neo-industrial development paradigm: A brief summary. Ekonomist=Economist, 2017, no 11, pp. 22-39. (In Russian).
  • Lukin E.V. Trends of the development of Russian socio-economic space. Voprosy territorial'nogo razvitiya=Territorial Development Issues, 2014, no. 7 (17). Available at: (In Russian).
  • Kul'kov V.M. Is the transition period in the Russian economy finished? Ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny: fakty, tendentsii, prognoz=Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 2015, no. 4 (40), pp. 45-59. (In Russian).
  • Muradov K.Yu. Is Russia embedded in global value chains? Vestnik NGUEU=Bulletin of NSUEM, 2015, no. 4, pp. 92-117. (In Russian).
  • Kaplinsky R. Globalisation and unequalisation: what can be learned from value chain analysis? Journal of Development Studies, 2000, vol. 37 (2), pp. 117-146.
  • DOI: 10.1080/713600071
  • Shirov A.A. Use of "input-output" tables to justify economic policy decisions. Problemy prognozirovaniya=Studies on Russian Economic Development, 2018, no. 6, pp. 12-25. (In Russian).
  • Miller R.E., Blair P.D. Input-Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 768 p.
  • Oosterhaven J., Hewings G. Interregional input-output models. In: Handbook of Regional Science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2014. Pp. 875-901.
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-23430-9_43
  • Cadarso M.A., Monsalve F., Arce G. Emissions burden shifting in global value chains - winners and losers under multi-regional versus bilateral accounting. Economic Systems Research, 2018, vol. 30 (4), pp. 439-461.
  • DOI: 10.1080/09535314.2018.1431768
  • Granberg A.G., Suslov V.I., Suspitsyn S.A. Economic and mathematical research of multi-regional systems. Region: ekonomika i sotsiologiya=Region: Economics and Sociology, 2008, no. 2, pp. 120-150. (In Russian).
  • Faturay F., Lenzen M., Nugraha K. A new sub-national multi-region input-output database for Indonesia.Economic Systems Research, 2007, vol. 29 (2), pp. 234-251.
  • DOI: 10.1080/09535314.2017.1304361
  • Oosterhaven J., Polenske K.R. Modern regional input-output and impact analyses. Handbook of Regional Growth and Development Theories, 2009. Pp. 423-439.
  • Zhang Z., Shi М., Zhao Z. The Compilation of China's interregional input-output model 2002. Economic Systems Research, 2015, vol. 27 (2), pp. 238-256.
  • DOI: 10.1080/09535314.2015.1040740
  • Mi Z., Meng J., Zheng H., Shan Y., Wei Y.M., Guan D. A multi-regional input-output table mapping China's economic outputs and interdependencies in 2012. Scientific Data, 2018, vol. 5, article number: 180155.
  • DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2018.155
  • Antràs P., Chor D., Fally T., Hillberry R. Measuring the upstreamness of production and trade flows. American Economic Review, 2012, vol. 102 (3), pp. 412-416.
  • DOI: 10.3386/w17819
  • Fally T. Production Staging: Measurement and Facts. University of Colorado-Boulder, 2012. 64 p.
  • Miller R.E., Temurshoev U. Output upstreamness and input downstreamness of industries/countries in world production. International Regional Science Review, 2017, vol. 40 (5), pp. 443-475.
  • DOI: 10.1177/0160017615608095
  • Fally T. On the Fragmentation of Production in the US. University of Colorado-Boulder, 2011. 49 p.
  • Chen B. Upstreamness, exports, and wage inequality: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing data. Journal of Asian Economics, 2017, vol. 48, pp. 66-74.
  • Ju J., Yu X. Productivity, profitability, production and export structures along the value chain in China. Journal of Comparative Economics, 2015, vol. 43 (1), pp. 33-54.
  • Hagemejer J., Tyrowicz J. Upstreamness of employment and global financial crisis in Poland: The role of position in global value chains. Economics of European Crises and Emerging Markets, 2017, pp. 217-236.
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-5233-0_10
  • Ito T., Vézina P.-L. Production fragmentation, upstreamness, and value-added: Evidence from factory Asia 1990-2005. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 2016, vol. 42, pp. 1-9.
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.jjie.2016.08.002
  • Beladi H., Chakrabarti A., Hollas D. Cross-border mergers and upstreaming. World Economy, 2017, vol. 40 (3), pp. 598-611.
  • DOI: 10.1111/twec.12320
  • Kuznetsov D., Sedalishchev V. Study of an average position of Russian economic sectors in value-added chains. Ekonomicheskaya Politika=Economic Policy, 2018, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 48-63. 10.18288/1994-5124-2018- 2-03. (In Russian)
  • DOI: 10.18288/1994-5124-2018-2-03.(InRussian)
  • Lukin E.V. Assessment of a position of Russian regions' economy in value-added chains. Problemy razvitiya territorii=Problems of Territory's Development, 2019, no. 2 (100), pp. 27-36. 10.15838/ptd.2019.2.100.1. (In Russian).
  • DOI: 10.15838/ptd.2019.2.100.1.(InRussian)
  • Ilyin V.A., Povarova A.I. Problems of regional development as a reflection of efficiency of public administration. Ekonomika regiona=Economy of Region, 2014, no. 3 (39), pp. 48-63. (In Russian).
Статья научная