WWW.DISSERS.RU


...
    !

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 36 | 37 || 39 | 40 |   ...   | 117 |

The increase of producer and intermediate goods share in the import structure with simultaneous decrease of the consumer goods share was a qualitatively new process in the Russian economy, which may turn out to be the start of priority change and increased incentives to production development in the environment of limited domestic material and technical resources. It seems that further development of the real economy sector in such situation will be dependent on the intensity of fixed capital investment targeted at modernization and diversification of the production. Besides, adjustment of capital goods and associated goods volumes characteristic for the period 20072008 has led to changes in industrial sector recovery structure in 20102011.

In industrial sector the post-crisis recovery both in 2008 and in 1998 started with the recovery of the growth rates in mineral wealth extraction driven by changes both in the global and domestic markets. In 2011 the mineral wealth extraction index made 104.9% versus the pre-crisis values of 2008. In processing crisis was more protracted during 20082009 compared to 1998 crisis, so getting back to the upward curve took twice as much time. Recovery of yields in processing and achieving the pre-crisis level of 2008 took place as late as in 2011.

The dependence of domestic production development dynamics, specifically of enterprises operating under the industrial assembly regime, on the imported goods supplies was Section The Real Sector of the Economy growing. In this context the import-replacing production and localization issues are becoming more and more relevant taking into account the special characteristics of development and modernization of certain processing industries of Russian economy. In the Social and Economic Development Forecast for the RF in 2012 and for the Planned Period of 2013 and 2014 it is declared that the key economic growth driver in the mid-term perspective should be not just in increase of investment and consumption, but more in increasing the level of competitiveness of domestic goods, which is to balance-off ruble exchange rate strengthening.

However, the domestic market dynamics forecast for 20122014 is still based on import boom.

Table Russian Federation Import Structure (balance of payments methodology), % to the outcome Goods consumer producer intermediate 2006 46.2 17.0 36.2007 44.4 18.9 36.2008 41.8 23.8 34.2009 44.3 19.7 36.2010 40.7 19.5 39.Q1 43.5 16.8 39.Q2 39.6 18.7 41.Q3 40.6 19.7 39.Q4 40.0 21.5 38.2011 36.6 21.4 42.Q1 40.2 18.2 41.Q2 35.2 20.3 44.Q3 35.0 23.0 42.Q4 37.0 23.0 40.Source: Federal Statistics Service.

As of the end of 2011 the GDP growth rate made 104.3% versus the preceding year. During H1 2011 this growth was mainly associated with favorable situation in the global market for raw materials and with consumer market expansion. Capital investment in H1 2011 grew by 2.7% with GDP growing by 3.7% versus the similar period of the preceding year.

In H2 of 2011 the accelerated GDP dynamics is connected with the structural specifics of the economic growth: capital investment growth rates were speeding up, as well as construction and agricultural production volumes, versus the similar period of the preceding year. In the end of 2011 capital investment grew by 6.2%, construction volumes by 5.1%, and agricultural production by 22.1%. As a result, 2011 domestic market dynamics was determined by simultaneous growth of the demand both for consumer goods and for investment. Retail trade turnover made 107.2% versus 2010, and the level of fee-based public services made 102.9%. The cumulative impact of these factors was enough to weaken the trend for slowing down the domestic demand for industrial products and infrastructure services.

In 2011 the industrial production growth was that of a recovery nature targeting the precrisis development trajectory. As of the year end, the industrial production index made 104.7% versus 2010. The outrunning growth rate in processing had the dominating impact on the whole industrial sector dynamics and structure. In processing production index made 106.5%, and in mining 101.9% versus the same indicators of 2010.

RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks Table Major macroeconomic indicators indices in 20102011, % to the preceding year Quarters Quarters 2010 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 QGross domestic product 104.3 103.5 105.0 103.1 104.5 104.3 104.1 103.4 104.8 104.9* Capital investment 106.0 95.2 105.6 105.3 111.1 108.3 99.2 105.0 108.2 113.Construction 103.5 92.7 100.8 106.6 107.1 105.1 101.6 101.0 107.6 106.Residential space commis- 97.6 91.1 107.3 85.7 102.3 106.6 97.8 95.1 115.0 111.sioning Industrial output 108.2 109.5 110.9 106.4 106.5 104.7 105.9 104.8 105.1 103.Extraction of mineral re- 103.6 106.7 104.8 101.3 102.0 101.9 103.3 101.7 102.2 101.sources Processing / manufacturing 111.8 112.1 116.3 109.5 109.9 106.5 110.6 105.8 105.7 104.Production of electric en- 104.1 107.7 102.6 103.9 101.6 100.1 99.0 101.9 101.4 98.ergy, gas and water Agricultural output 88.7 100.5 98.6 79.2 96.2 122.1 100.7 100.6 116.9 132.Freight turnover 106.9 111.6 113.0 101.7 102.5 103.4 103.9 105.2 102.4 102.Retail turnover 106.3 102.2 106.9 108.4 107.4 107.2 105.2 106.1 107.9 109.-food products 105.1 103.7 105.7 107.3 103.7 103.6 101.4 101.3 103.8 107.-non-food products 107.6 100.9 108.1 109.5 111.0 110.7 109.0 111.0 111.8 110.-fee-based public ser- 101.5 99.9 101.6 101.5 102.6 103.0 102.9 103.8 102.4 102.vices Foreign trade turnover 131.1 144.1 139.0 126.3 121.4 130.2 129.8 139.5 130.0 124.-export 132.0 161.1 143.4 118.4 118.1 130.4 123.8 138.4 134.2 128.-import 129.7 118.8 132.4 139.5 126.7 129.9 141.9 141.5 124.1 118.Real disposable cash income 104.2 107.3 103.7 104.5 102.1 100.8 100.0 99.0 101.6 102.Real wages 105.2 103.1 106.1 105.1 104.2 104.2 101.6 102.7 103.8 108.Total number of unem- 88.9 96.2 86.6 86.8 85.2 89.1 85.7 88.1 91.8 91.ployed Number of officially regis- 90.0 114.2 91.1 81 74.9 76.9 73.1 75.4 78.0 80.tered unemployed * preliminary estimates.

Source: Federal Statistics Service, RF Ministry of Economic Development.

Last years domestic market expansion was taking place in the context of changes in the structure of the demand for domestic goods. Special feature of 2011 situation was growth of stock in the second half of the year. Dynamic growth of stock remained one of the key drivers for higher GDP growth rates in the second half of the year despite the fact that production growth in industry overall was slowing down. Let us note, that the forecast for 2012 by the RF Ministry of economic development assumes some slowdown of the economic growth to 103.7%, including due to exhaustion of the stock contribution into the recovery growth of the economy.

4.1.2. Major characteristics of GDP utilization The trend of investment growth acting across the whole period between 2000 and demonstrated a breaking point in 2009, so the decline of capital investment was registered for the first time after 1998 crisis. Recovery of capital investment in 20102011 was characterized by pretty slow pace and was taking shape under the inertial influence of the preceding three years and factors acting at that time. Starting from Q2 2010 investment started to grow.

In 2010 capital investment growth rate made 106.0%, and in 2011 it was 108.3% 2011.

However, when evaluating the dynamics of this indicator, one needs to take into account that in 2009 the base line was very low. In 2009 capital investment fell by 15.7%, so the decline was much deeper than during 1998 crisis. As the result, capital investment in 2011 made 96.7% of 2008 level.

Section The Real Sector of the Economy 2008 2009 2010 2011 I II III IV I II III IV I II III IV I II III IV* -2008 2009 2010 ---- Investments in capital assets GDP Source: Federal Statistics Service.

Fig. 4. GDP and capital investment dynamics in 20082011, % to the preceding year In the context of the situation with capital markets and savings resources the capital investment share in GDP structure during 20092010 period went down to 20.4% (compare with 21.3% - the maximum value for the last decade registered in 2008). In 2011, despite the savings ratio going up to 31.9% GDP thus exceeding the average of the preceding two years by almost 3 p.p. GDP, the capital investment share in GDP structure made 19.4% and remained below the average of the preceding two years by 1 p.p. GDP.

Table Gross savings, gross capital formation and capital investment shares in GDP structure during 19982010, % of total 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Gross savings 30.8 31.4 32.6 33.2 33.8 33.9 33.3 24.6 29.0 31.Gross capital formation 20.0 20.7 20.8 20.0 21.2 24.4 25.1 18.6 22.3 24.including:

gross fixed capital formation 17.9 18.3 18.3 17.7 18.5 21.2 22.0 21.6 21.3 20.Capital investment 16.3 16.6 16.8 16.7 17.6 20.2 21.3 20.6 20.3 19.Source: Federal Statistics Service.

Consumer demand growth across the whole 2011 remained one of the main supporting economic growth drivers. In 2011 real income of the population made 100.8%, real wages 104.2%, and real granted pension amounts 101.2% to the respective 2010 values.

Overall, during the period of 2009-2011 real disposable income of the population went up by 9.8% versus the pre-crisis indicator of 2008. Let us note that structural specifics of real income dynamics were determined by the growth of the granted pensions (161.1% to 2008) outrunning the growth of the real wages (105.8%).

In the context of growth of the real income of population in 2010 the consumer market recovered at the pre-crisis level of 2008. Retail sales turnover in 2011 went up by 7.2% versus the preceding year. Snap acceleration of the non-food goods markets growth rate in the context of food products retail turnover rates slowdown became the characteristic feature of RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks 2011. Non-food market turnover growth index made 110.7% versus 2010, and for food products it was 103.6%. At the same time, it is worth noting that while the food product market exceeded the pre-crisis level of 2008 by 3.3% in 2010 and by 7.1% in 2011, the non-food market was able to recover at the pre-crisis level only in 2011. Inflation rate slowdown in 2011 had a significant impact on forming of this trend: in food products market inflation rate went down to 103.9% (compare with 112.9% in the preceding year), and the price change was bigger in non-food market (106.7% in 2011 versus 105.7% in 2010) and fee-based public services market (108.7% versus 108.1%).

I II III IV I II III IV 2008 2009 2010 2011 2010 2011* --food products market non-food products maarket food products price index food products price index *preliminary estimates.

Source: Federal Statistics Service, RF Ministry of Economic Development.

Fig. 5. Consumer markets and prices growth rates in 20082011, % to the respective period of the preceding year -2010 2011 I II III IV I II III IV 2010 Q 2011 Q 53,7 57,2 55,3 51,8 55,4 52,6 60,4 55,7 58,5 Purchase of goods 15,1 15,4 16,4 15,2 15,6 13,6 16,7 15,7 15,8 13,Paying for services 9,8 10,1 9,4 9,7 10,1 10,1 9,6 9,8 10,4 10,Making mandatory payments and charges 14,6 10,3 15,8 15,5 12,1 15,1 10,6 11,1 6,8 12,Savings total 7,7 5,3 6,6 8,7 5 9,9 2,8 6,1 2,5 8,including in deposits and securitie 3,7 4,3 3,2 3,2 4,1 4 3,8 3,9 4,8 4,Purchase of currency 2 1,2 -1,3 3,5 1,3 3,6 -2,6 2,4 1,9 2,Cash in hand Source: Federal Statistics Service.

Fig. 6. Structure of using cash income of population in 20102011, % of total Section The Real Sector of the Economy Retail sales growth factors in 2011 remained based on savings ratio going down and consumer crediting going up. The share of savings in the income of population went down to 10.3% versus 14.6% in 2010, including savings in deposits and securities going down to 5.3% versus 7.7%. As of the end of December 2011 loans to individuals were issued for Rb 5,550.9bn and increased 1.36 times versus the same month of 2010.

4.1.3. Changes in GDP structure formation by revenue sources Domestic market growth support in 2011 was based on redistribution of income from enterprises to the population. The share of wages in GDP in 2011 made 49.9% versus the average of 46.1% in the period between 2002 and 2008. The insurance premiums increase impacted the structure of GDP formation from the revenues point of view. It resulted in decrease of the gross profit of the economy as GDP share in 2011 by 1.2 p.p. versus the preceding year remaining below the pre-crisis level of 20081.

Table Structure of GDP formation by revenue sources in 20082011, % of total, on current basis 2008 2009 2010 Q1 Q2 Q3 QGross domestic product 100 100 100 100 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.including:

Wages of hired employees, including 47.4 52.6 49.9 49.3 53.8 51.7 47.5 45.latent salaries and mixed income Net production and import taxes 20.0 16.7 18.2 20 19.4 20.8 19.6 20.Gross profit in economics and gross 32.6 30.7 31.9 30.7 26.8 27.5 32.9 34.mixed income Source: Federal Statistics Service.

Within the structure of employed population employers providing for full-time employment of their hires and the self-employed make 8%. This is the factor determining the specific characteristics of GDP and population income structure. Almost 66% of population income in 2011 was formed at the expense of hired employees wages.

High level of salary differentiation by types of business is a characteristic feature of Russian economy. In industrial production the degree of differentiation is determined by the growing gap in manufacturing and in sectors associated with mineral resources extraction. In the latter the nominal gross payroll in 2011 was 1.88 times higher the average level of wages across the economy. As for fuel-and-energy sector, the wages there were 2.2 times above the average. In manufacturing wages were 93% of the average level and only 45% of the wages at producing facilities. Gross payroll on petroleum products production and transportation of fuel and energy resources, as well as in financial sector was 2.3 higher than average level across the economy. In education and healthcare average wages got down to 6574% of average level across the economy. The specifics of wages by types of business significantly impacted the structure of both revenue and expenditure formation, on consumer demand, on employment profile and distribution of resources across the economy.

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 36 | 37 || 39 | 40 |   ...   | 117 |



2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .