SOME ASPECTS OF THE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT OF NEO-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ECONOMY

Abstract

The relevance of economic development based on the neo-industrial model is increasing against the backdrop of ongoing global risks and challenges. The number of scientific studies aimed at finding mechanisms and substantiating the principles and advantages of neo-industrial development, identifying differences from other models of economic development, developing measures to level its shortcomings, is growing exponentially. However, the lack of research related to the development of methodological approaches to assessing the processes of neo-industrial development has not yet been eliminated. Due to the lack of a unified interpretation of the concept of "neo-industrial development", the results of available scientific works do not reflect the entire spectrum of characteristics of this phenomenon. The attempts of many researchers to develop the author's methodology for assessing the processes of non-industrial development of the economy have an insufficient level of practical significance, since the output is either excessively cumbersome methods, burdened by a significant number of indicators, or insufficiently substantiated from a methodological point of view. Highly specialized methods for assessing non-industrial development are able to track only one subsystem (sector) of production-economic or socio-cultural transformations caused by neo-industrial transformations. The purpose of this article is to identify the features and patterns in methodological approaches in assessing the neo-industrial development of the economy. The article analyzes individual methodological approaches to assessing the neo-industrial development of the economy. Regularities and peculiarities of the author's methods have been revealed both in terms of filling with indicators (indicators) and in terms of methods for calculating a generalizing indicator of neo-industrial development. It has been determined that when developing a methodology for assessing neo-industrial development processes, the most rational method is the index method. Taking this into account, the directions of improving the methodological approach to assessing neo-industrial development in the context of the selection of target indicators and indicators are substantiated.

Keywords

assessment methodology, economic model, neo-industrial development

References

Jeon B., and Suh S.-H. Design Considerations and Architecture for Cooperative Smart Factory: MAPE/BD Approach // Procedia Manufacturing. 2018. Vol. 26. Pp. 1094-1106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.07.146

Gupta S., Keen M., Shah A., and Verdier G. Digital revolutions in public finance. Washington, DC. International Monetary Fund, 2017. 343 p.

Smit J., Kreutzer S., Moeller C., and Carlberg M. Industry 4.0. European Parliament. Directorate General for Internal Policies Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policy. European Union, 2016. 90 p.

Jeschke S., Brecher C., Song Y., andRawat D.B. Industrial Internet of Things. Cybermanufacturing Systems. Herausgeber: Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2017. 715 p.

Sundararajan A. The Future of Work // Finance & Development. 2017. Vol. 54(2). Pp. 7-11.

Bodrunov S.D. Integration of Manufacturing, Science and Education as aBasis for the Re-Industrialization of Russia // World Economy and International Relations. 2015. Vol. 10. Рр. 94-104. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2015-10-94-104

Ryazanov V.T. New industrialization or dreams of a post-industrial ideal? // Sociological Studies. 2014. Vol. 11(367). Рр. 140-142. (In Russ.).

Romanova O.A. Evolution of institutions for new industrial policy implementation // The Manager. 2019. Vol. 10(3). Рр. 14-24. DOI: 10.29141/2218-5003-2019-10-3-2

Idrisov G.I., Knyaginin V.N., Kudrin A.L., and Rozhkova E.S. New technological revolution: Challenges and opportunities for Russia // Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2018. Vol. 4. Pр. 5-25. (In Russ.). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-4-5-25

Government of Japan. Report on the 5th Science and Technology Basic Plan. Council for Science, Technology and Innovation Cabinet Office. 2015, December 18. Pp. 13-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24411/2072-8042-2021-5-25-35

Andreeva E.L., Krasnykh S.S., and Ratner A.V. Measuring neo-industrial export specialization of regions // Russian Foreign Economic Journal. 2021. Vol. 5. Рр.25-35. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24411/2072-8042-2021-5-25-35

Korovin G.B. Resource and technology abilities of regional new industrialization // Bulletin of the Transbaikal State University. 2013. Vol. 9(100). Рр.143-151. (In Russ.).

Fourastie J. Great hope of the 20th century. Technological progress, economic progress, social progress. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1949. 224 p. (In French).

Overview report on modernization in the world and China (2001-2010) / English translation by N.I. Lapin. Moscow: Publishing House “Ves’ mir”, 2011. 256 р. (In Russ.).

Lu H. Research on the Index System of New-type Industrialization of China // The Index of Science & Engineering (SEI) Database. 2008. pp. 963-968.

Romanova O.A., Akberdina V.V., and Bryantseva O.S. The potential of old industrial region in a neo-industrial development paradigm // Bulletin of the Transbaikal State University. 2013. Vol. 2(93). Рр. 143-152. (In Russ.).

Pisarskaya O.V. Methodological tools for evaluation of neo-industrialization of the economy // Journal of Economy and Entrepreneurship. 2017. Vol. 6(83). Рр. 41-47. (In Russ.).

About the Author

Evgeny V. Kotov – PhD in Economics, Senior Researcher; Associate Professor, Donetsk Academy of Management and Public Service under the Head of Donetsk People's Republic, Donetsk, Donetsk People's Republic. E-mail: kotovev@mail.ru. SPIN РИНЦ 3723-1631. ORCID 0000-0002-0926-3072

For citation

Kotov E.V. Some Aspects of the Methodological Approach to Assessment of Neo-Industrial Development of the Economy // BENEFICIUM. 2021. Vol. 2(39). Pp. 39-47. (InRuss.). DOI: 10.34680/BENEFICIUM.2021.2(39).39-47