Pushkinskaya st. 43. office 10
Rostov-on-Don, Russia
e-mail: info@hjournal.ru 
tel. +7(863) 269-88-14

cubsEN (2)

Entrepreneurs As a Subject of Modern Russian Economy Development: General Characteristics and «Resource Type» Regions Specificity

Entrepreneurs As a Subject of Modern Russian Economy Development: General Characteristics and «Resource Type» Regions Specificity

Journal of Institutional Studies, , Vol. 8 (no. 2),

Nowadays, special urgency has the question about the ability of entrepreneurs to act as a subject of the Russian economy development. Analysis of the specificity of targets and resource potential of the modern Russian entrepreneurs is fulfilled in the context of the general features of entrepreneurship development in the countries with "emerging markets". Distinction between "politicized" entrepreneurs, as prevailing type of entrepreneurs in these countries, and "classic" entrepreneurs is shown. Two basic strategies of their behavior in the form of "rent-seeking" and "institutional" entrepreneurship are highlighted. Incentives and constraints of "institutional" entrepreneurship strategies selection made by "politicized" entrepreneurs are considered in the context of assessing the potential of the Russian entrepreneurs as a subject of economic development as well as emerging positive externalities. Analysis is regionalized to consider the specificity of the behavior of entrepreneurs in the economy of the "resource type" regions. Models of "enclave dual economy" and "integrated regional economy" are discrete structural alternatives for "resource type" regions development. "Sectoral" frontiers of net positive externalities that emerge from institutional entrepreneurs’ activity related to the implementation of productive configurations institutions are considered as well as a choice between the "rent-seeking" and "institutional" entrepreneurship. Kemerovo region and Krasnoyarsk region are the basic regions to analyze incentives and constraints of entrepreneurs in the economy of the "resource type" regions. The authors use sociological tools in the form of semi-structured interviews. Initial evaluation of the eight entrepreneurs’ strategies of Kemerovo region and Krasnoyarsk region shows that the most of them used elements of the institutional entrepreneurs’ strategy and focused on the diversification of the regional economy. At the same time, the presence of individual achievements does not mean a significant improvement in the conditions for the development of productive entrepreneurship. The lack of an effective system of communications between institutional entrepreneurs and decision-making representatives of regional authorities is the key problem.

Keywords: "classic" and "politicized" entrepreneurs; institutional entrepreneurs; "resource type" region; discrete structural alternatives; "enclave dual economy"; "integrated regional economy".

  • Baumol W. J. (1990). Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive and Destructive. Journal of Political Economy, vol. 98, no. 5, pp. 893-920.
  • Baumol W. J. (2013). The Microtheory of Innovative Entrepreneurship. Moscow, Gaidar Institute Publ. (In Russian).
  • Braudel F. (1982). The Wheels of Commerce. London, William Collins Sons & Co Ltd.
  • Daokui Li. D., Feng J. and Jiang H. (2006). Institutional Entrepreneurs. The American Economic Review, vol. 96, no. 2, pp. 358-362.
  • Desai S. and Acs Z. J. (2007). A Theory of Destructive Entrepreneurship. Jena Economic Research Papers, no. 2007-085.
  • Douhan R. and Henrekson M. (2007). The Political Economy of Entrepreneurship. IFN Working Paper, no. 716.
  • Fisman R. (2001). Estimating the Value of Political Connections. The American Economic Review, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 1095-1102.
  • Fisman R. and Miguel E. (2012). Economic Gangsters. Corruption, Violence and the Poverty of Nations. Moscow, «United Press» Publ. (In Russian).
  • Gorbunov A. (2013). Pipes without commission. Expert, no. 25 (856). (http://expert.ru/expert/2013/25/trubyi-bez-komissii/ - Access Date: 03.05.2016). (In Russian).
  • Grossman S. J. and Hart O. D. (1986). The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration. Journal of Political Economy, vol. 94. no. 4, pp. 691-719.
  • Kudiyarov S. (2016). History of one industry. Expert, no. 10(978). (http://expert.ru/expert/2016/10/istoriya-odnoj-otrasli/media/279206/ - Access Date: 03.05.2016). (In Russian).
  • Levin S. N. (2008). Regional localization and segmentation of the institutional environment in the post-Soviet Russian economy. Scientific Papers of Donetsk National Technical University, vol. 34-1, pp. 163-170. (In Russian).
  • Levin S. N. (2014). Markets of power, regimes of property rights and political resources of entrepreneurs in modern Russia. Universe of Russia, no. 4, pp. 35-59. (In Russian).
  • Mokyr J. (2014). The Lever of Riches. Technological Creativity and Economic Progress. Moscow, Gaidar Institute Publ. (In Russian).
  • Ruttan V. W. and Hayami Y. (1984). Toward a Theory of Induced Institutional Innovation. The Journal of Development Studies, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 203-223.
  • Schumpeter J. (1982). Theory of Economic Development. (The study of business profits, capital, credit, interest and conditions of the cycle). Moscow, Progress Publ. (In Russian).
  • Soto de H. (2004). The Mystery of Capital. Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Falls Everywhere Else. Moscow, Olymp Press Publ. (In Russian).
  • Stiglitz J. (2003). Globalization and its Discontents. Moscow, Publ. House of National Public and Scientific Fund. (In Russian).
  • Volkov V. V. (2005). Power entrepreneurship: Economic and Sociological Analysis. Moscow, Publ. House of SU-HSE. (In Russian).
Publisher: Ltd. "Humanitarian perspectives"
Founder: Ltd. "Humanitarian perspectives"
Online-ISSN: 2412-6039
ISSN: 2076-6297