by 7% up to 26.8 billion rubles. In real terms they The program of supporting flax and hemp growwill grow by only 1.15% (Table 1). Meanwhile, the ing (expenditures thereon increase at the highest share of agrifood sector in the total federal budget rate!) and the program of encouraging wool producexpenditures in 2002 will drop to 1.38%. tion are not discontinued although their inefficiency However, the amount of outlays is not the major is almost not disputed. Moreover, the flax and indicator of the government agricultural policies. hemp program is expanded by 43%.
The goals and programs they are targeted for are Given the revival of crop production, the state much more important. In 2000 the RF Ministry of support of seed growing looks irrational since it beAgriculture accepted a new concept of the middle- comes commercially lucrative. Nevertheless, the term agrifood sector development. We find this amount of corresponding budget allocations steadconcept to be quite an innovatory one as it aims to ily grows (in 2001 - 3.5 fold, in 2002 - by 8%).
further reform the sector. In 2001 a program of But the most disappointing fact is that the grain market development in the country was budget has no provisions for some important activiadopted and some of its provisions are currently be- ties: interventions projected by the Ministry of Aging carried out. Still, the 2002 draft budget seems riculture; sugar tenders; air photography of planted not to be designed for implementing the devised areas envisaged in the program of grain market destrategy. Its basic component - agricultural produc- velopment.
tion subsidies - copies the scheme that emerged in Education and R&D will be the major beneficiarmid-1990's. ies from bigger budget allocations to the agrifood One should mention though that one of the most sector. This is a positive shift in the structure of exefficient programs, i.e. the program of subsidizing penditures. Still, it's not absolutely doubt-free. For the interest rate on seasonal credits to agriculture example, 40 million rubles are allocated to financ(enacted in mid-2000), in 2002 will get a sound fi- ing R&D in the framework of special federal pronancial support: nominal expenditures thereon will gram "Improvement of soil fertility". Such a big rise by 57% (Table 2). The growth of agricultural spending on these purposes can mean that one more production for three years round and the restructur- program of melioration is being initiated in the ing of sector's debts in 2001 inspire hope for larger country (following the notorious campaign of early credits to agriculture, and thus bigger budget allo- 1980's). Nowadays soil fertility on non-meliorated cations to interest rate subsidizing are quite justi- areas is deteriorating due to insufficient application fied. of mineral and organic fertilizers. The reversal of The financing of heavily criticized program of this trend doesn't require large spendings on R&D.
state leasing will be well below the 2001 plan (in Thus, their amount may be a sign that the above fact this budget item has got almost no funds). mentioned program (already approved by the govSince attempts to reform the leasing mechanism ernment) prioritizes water-based melioration the effailed, the reduction of expenditures thereon may fect of which is remote and most expensive.
be viewed as a rather positive fact: the state's with- Financing of the Russian Academy of Agriculdrawal from this market will probably free the way tural Sciences is notably increased - more than 1.fold. Expenditures on fundamental research grow of which are loss-making) has to be notably curslower than the overall budget allocations to the tailed. A lot of state livestock breeding farms can Academy while spendings on international coopera- be privatized since in the current situation there are tion rise sharply accounting for 4% of the total. domestic buyers eager to make such an investment.
As to the functional structure of the budget, fi- The draft 2002 budget charges the recently nancing of the Agricultural Ministry's subdivisions formed Russian Agricultural Bank and "Rosagroand institutions (falling into expenses under clause leasing" to act as the Government agents for col"Agriculture") is up nearly 2.5 fold. This is due to lecting debts payable under credit and leasing the re-subordination of many formerly regional ser- agreements. The amount of their remuneration for vices to the federal Ministry. The step is largely fulfilling this function will be up to 20 million rujustified. However, it would bring much better re- bles (Clauses 79-82). However, it's not clarified sults if the allocated funds were used for radical whether it will be paid in case the debts are recovreformation of the agrifood sector management, for ered in full or just to some extent. To our mind, the making inventory of subordinate institutions in or- remuneration should be proportionate to the percent der to stop or reorganize their activities. For exam- of collected debts.
ple, the number of state unitary enterprises (many Table 1. Federal budget expenditures on the agrifood sector in 2000, 2001 and 2002 (million rubles) 2000 % of 2001 2002 2002 as plan revised plan execution execution in plan plan % of Agriculture and fish- 15 440 16 933 13 392 79 20 801 26 822 128.ery Agricultural production 8 627 10 126 6 607 65 9 628 20 445 212.Land resources 6 772 6 766 6 746 100 6 912 1 937 28.Fishery - - - 2 206 2 922 132.Other activities 41 41 41 99 2 055 1 518 73.Procurement - - - - - - - Total budget expendi- 1 014 196 1 031 376 1 029 184 100 1 193 484 1 947 386 163.tures Share of agriculture 1.52% 1.64% 1.30% - 1.74% 1.38% in the total budget expenditures Source: Draft RF Laws "On 2001 federal budget", "On 2002 federal budget" and "On execution of 2000 budget".
Table 2. Subsidies to agriculture in 2000-2002 (million rubles) 2000 % of 2001 2002 2002 as plan revised plan execution execution in plan plan % of 604 604 603 100 960 1 060 110.Livestock production 298 298 298 100 620 625 100.livestock breeding 142 142 142 100 270 320 118.sheep production 162 162 162 100 - - purchase of mixed feed - - - - 40 45 112.fur production - - - - 70 70 100.reindeer production 223 223 223 100 550 650 118.Crop production 68 68 68 100 250 270 108.seed production 72 72 72 100 70 100 142.flax and hemp production 83 83 100 230 280 121.compensation for insurance costs 7 637 9 136 5 620 62 6 719 11 784 175.Other expenditures 2 570 6 144 239.current operational costs of 2 419 2 417 2 365 subordinate institutions 1 124 2 624 2 624 100 3 000 2 780 92.leasing 11 11 3 26 40 40 100.subsidies to utilization plants 100 100 100 100 150 150 100.federal seed reserve 2000 % of 2001 2002 2002 as plan revised plan execution execution in plan plan % of - - - - 300 864 288.capital costs - - - - 450 300 66.building of pesticide reserve 1 368 1 367 - 87 - 6 1 398 2 200 157.Interest rate subsidizing - - - - - 4 751 Federal program "Improvement of soil fertility in Russia" (2002-2005) - - - - 2500 1951 128.melioration - - - - 2650 2 500 106.compensation of expenses on mineral fertilizers 2 2 2 100 - - Private farmers 15 440 16 933 13 392 79 20 801 26 822 128.Total Source: Draft RF Laws "On 2001 federal budget", "On 2002 federal budget" and "On execution of 2000 budget".
Picture 1. Expenditures on agriculture in the federal budget 30 000 2,00% 1,74% 1,80% 1,61% 25 1,52% 1,60% 1,38% 1,40% 20 1,20% 15 000 1,00% 26 0,80% 20 10 0,60% 15 0,40% 5 9 0,20% - 0,00% 1999 2000 2001 Expenditures on agriculture in the federal budget Share of agriculture in the total budget expenditures Serova E.V., Shick O.V.
Foreign trade October 2001 showed a notable fall in Russia’s tober 2000, which became the maximal value since foreign trade indicators. Exports accounted for August 1998. As a result of a sharp rise in imports USD 8.233 bln. vs. 8.57 reported in September and and a substantial fall in exports, in October 9.044 in October 2000. The October export index Russia’s foreign trade balance became minimal proved to be minimal since April 2000, however, since September 1999 and accounted for USD absolute values of export still were at rather a high 3.482 bln. vs. 4.232 bln. in September 2001 and level. Imports accounted for USD 4.751 bln. vs. 4.912 bln. in October 2000.
4.338 bln. in September 2001 and 4.132 bln. in Oc % million rubles Fig.1. Main indices of Russia’s foreign trade (as USD bln.) Main indices of Russia’s foreign trade (as USD bln.) -1997 г. 1998 г. 1999 г. 2000 г. 2001 г.
Balance Export Import Source: Goskomstat of RF The reasons for the fall in exports are well tive index in September and almost at 30% down known - that is, a sharp oil price downfall. In Octo- vs. October 2000. The prices for non-ferrous metals ber 2001 the average price for Urals was USD and other Russian exports fell, too.
19.77/barrel, or at USD 5.17 down vs. the respecTable 1. The average monthly world prices in October respective year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Oil (Brent), USD/barrel 24,08 17,9 12,8 24,1 32,14 21,Gasoline, USD/gallon 2,742 2,346 2,205 2,558 5,767 2,Copper, USD/t 0,6704 0,5695 0,4205 0,6986 0,8945 0,Aluminum, USD/t 1968,5 1900,7 1659,2 1748,1 1838,6 1405,Nickel, USD/t 1341,1 1538,5 1354,2 1470,7 1473,5 1280,Oil (Brent), USD/barrel 7060,9 6240,5 4262,4 7984,2 7353,2 4836,After some slowdown in import growth rate in countries that supplied the major (98%) part of fish the 3rd quarter, in October import supplies once delicatessen.
again demonstrated their high rise and reached the Despite the continuous threat of mad cow dismaximal value ever reported since the 1998 crisis. ease, meat supplies to Russia grew considerably, The major driving force underpinning the process is too. Between January through November 2001 imthe rise in the population’s real disposable incomes. port meat supplies to Russia accounted for 663.2 t., The latter grew by 9.7% in October compared to or at 81% over the respective period of the prior their respective level of the prior year. However the year. However the crisis in the meat sector helped rise in imports is confronted by the acceleration of our importers decrease contract prices - the average the USD appreciation and, consequently, the slow- price for 1 t. of meat slid from USD 1,173.2 to down of the process of strengthening of the Rb. in 1003.6. Import supplies of the US chicken thighs real terms. was still growing - during 10 months of 2001 their According the data to SCS of RF on the ten import practically doubled (2. times) compared months of 2001, Russia began to import far more with 10 months of 2000.
meat, poultry and fish. Thus, the import supplies of In October, Russia’s goods turnover with the fish grew by 58%- up to 324.3 Thos. t. worth a total Commonwealth nations made up USD 2.41 bln., of USD 135.3 mln., while the respective figures in with exports accounting for 1.35 bln. (a 9.4% rise 2000 were 205.3 Thos.t. worth USD 76.8 mln.. The compared with October 2000), and imports - 1.average price per 1t. of fish grew from USD 374.2 bln., or at 16 down compared with the respective up to 417.1. Notably, it mostly was Far- Abroad period in question. The trend to fall in import supplies, which is related chiefly to new rules of taxa Sep Sep Sep Sep Sep Jule Jule Jule Jule Jule May May May May May Jan.
March March March March March tion of import from the neighboring countries, con- stuffs, chemicals that together account for over tinued to intensify. 70%.
In October, Russia’s exports grew: crude oil- at While pursuing the most conservative economic more than 50%, natural gas- at 70%, cellulose - 3 policy towards the third countries in the foreign times more. At the same time gasoline supplies fell trade area, Belarus is still active in employing proby almost 25%, while black oil- by over 70%, tectionist methods. Specifically, as early as April which is likely to be attributed to the end of the 2002 import of tobacco goods will be restricted: the harvesting season in the neighboring regions and importation of tobacco goods will be permitted only more profitable conditions of such supplies to if the license and a part of import quota are granted.
Western countries. In compliance with the RF Government’s ResoThe average export prices for Russian oil, gaso- lution of November 30, 2001, # 930 “On customs line, and black oil supplied to the Commonwealth tariff of the Russian Federation and commodity ascountries were higher than the analogous prices for sortment used in the course of implementation of these goods supplied to the third countries, while foreign trade activity”, the import customs duty passenger cars, cast iron, nickel and aluminum were rates on 140 items (of which by 90% - were lowexported to the Commonwealth countries at prices ered) have been changed effective of January 1, higher than those quoted for the third countries. 2002. The new Customs Tariff has accumulated all In October, the CIS countries held almost 90% of the changes in the import customs duty rates Russian export of condensed milk and cream, 30% adopted between 2000 through 2001 or those apcereals and 60% of vegetable oil. Because the ex- proved by the governmental commission on protecport prices for meat, poultry, animal butter and sun- tive measures in foreign trade and customs and tarflower seeds oil from the CIS countries proved to iff policy. Specifically, the rates for audio- and be higher than the Western ones, meat imports from video equipment were lowered from 20 to 15%, the CIS countries to Russia fell by almost 30%, from 10 to %- for fruits, from 20 to 10%- for vitasunflower seeds oil- by 20%, and cream butter- by mins, from 15 to 10% for parts for kinescopes, from 5%. 20 to 15% for assembly parts or radio- and TV- In December 2001 the CIS countries celebrated equipment, from 25 to 20%- for sewing machines, the 10th anniversary of establishment of the Com- from 10 to 5%- for single- bucket loaders, and from monwealth and concluded results, specifically, in 10% to 5%- for polymer pellicle. In the course of terms of economic co-operation. In the meantime tariff development the government has also coordione can argue that Russia continues to strengthen nated changes in rates proposed by ministries and its position as the leader of the Commonwealth and agencies concerned. For example, the import duty the country’s socio-political situation would have a rate for salmon caviar was introduced, whilst previcrucial impact on the development of the integra- ously there was a unified rate for all kinds of fish tion union on the whole.
Материалы этого сайта размещены для ознакомления, все права принадлежат их авторам.
Если Вы не согласны с тем, что Ваш материал размещён на этом сайте, пожалуйста, напишите нам, мы в течении 1-2 рабочих дней удалим его.