| ... | 8
| ... | 14
The vector of internal migrations shifts from the north – west to the south - west. During the inter – census period, there was an inflow of population into the south – western part of the country, especially into the Central Federal District (CFD). According to registration records, the CFD accounted for 2.2 million out of the 3.7 million persons who comprised net migration into Russia in 1989 – 2002. The data of the Census were a clear indication that the attracting force of the Center was even stronger than that.18 In 1990, 67 % of the migrants who had come to Russia or had resettled within its territory were younger than 30; by the year 2004 this figure had dropped to 54.8 %. Most strongly affected was the proportion of children, which declined from 19.7 % to 13 % for children aged 0 - 15, and from 15.2 % to 11.2 % for teenagers aged 16 – 19. By contrast, the proportion of those over 40 years of age considerably increased – from 16.9 % to 30.6 %, or almost two – fold.
Provided that the entire migration adjustment is concerned with Moscow, it could be assumed that the migration – related population growth in the Central District amounted to approximately 4 million persons, or more than 60 % of the positive net migration calculated by district. As a proportion of the total population of the Central District in 1989, ---------Городское население Сельское население Figure 4. The migration – related growth of urban and rural population.
1980 – 2004, in thousands of persons Table 1.
The migration – related population growth, by federal district, 1989 – 2002, in thousands of persons Including due to:
external migration Total internal migration total of which with CIS countries with other counand Baltic states tries Russia 3729.5 0.0 3729.6 4892.6 -1163.Federal districts Central 2201.2 971.1 1230.1 1453.9 -223.North – Western 62.0 -121.3 183.3 333.5 -150.Southern 1094.1 168.3 925.8 1087.4 -161.Volga 1156.1 184.4 971.7 1110.0 -138.Urals 203.2 -102.7 305.9 399.3 -93.Siberian -20.4 -336.1 315.7 654.0 -338.Far – Eastern -966.7 -763.8 -202.9 -145.5 -57. Source: current records. The final results for Russia and for the components of external migration slightly differ from the data of Table 1, because the data of the Goskomstat slightly differ from one source to another.
Along with the CFD, a noticeable and approximately equal migration – related population growth was achieved by the Southern and Volga districts, each increasing its population by 1.1 million persons (or by 5.3 % and 3.6 %, by comparison with the 1989 population size, respectively). At that time, owing to the inflow from the post – Soviet countries, a certain migration – related population growth was achieved by even those regions that had been loosing population for decades – the oblasts of the Chernozem Center, the the migration – related population growth amounted to 10.5 %, but it was merely enough to compensate for the natural loss of population.
So far as the entire migration adjustment is concerned with Moscow, it could be assumed that the migration – related population growth in the Central District amounted to approximately 4 million persons, or more than 60 % of the positive net migration calculated by district. As a proportion of the total population of the Central District in 1989, the migration – related population growth amounted to 10.5 %, but it was merely enough to compensate for the natural loss of population.
regions of the Volga – Viatka area, and the oblasts around Moscow and St Petersburg. A negligible growth was registered in the Urals District, where it amounted to 203 thousand persons. The North – Western and Siberian Districts had a virtually balanced population exchange. The Far – Eastern District lost almost million persons, or 6 % of its 1989 population (Table 1). In most cases, the main source of the migration – related population growth - migration from the CIS countries and the Baltic states - has compensated for the losses caused by internal migration and the unfavorable population exchange with other countries. A review of the regional trends for the past fifteen years gives no hope for the course of migrations to be reversed once again towards the east of the country.
So far as internal migration during the period under consideration is concerned, it was clearly centripetal.
In the first half of the 1990s, the drive toward the Center was not very pronounced. The number of migrants absorbed by the Southern and Volga Districts was almost similar to that absorbed by the Center (Figure 5), while by the coefficients of attraction, the Center lagged behind the Southern District by 1.5 times.
--Центральный федеральный округ Северо-Западный федеральный округ Южный федеральный округ Приволжский федеральный округ Уральский федеральный округ Сибирский федеральный округ Дальневосточный федеральный округ Figure 5. Net migration, by federal district, 1989 – 2004, in thousands of persons The more migration from the CIS countries and the Baltic states declined, the more pronounced was the attractiveness of Russia’s Center. In 2001 – 04, the Central District absorbed practically all the population redistributed by migrations between the country districts and more than one half of the migration – related population growth of Russia caused by external migration, while external migration became the main donor of the District. The population inflow into the Center, although slightly reduced, has become stabilized at a relatively high level, while the migration – related population growth in the other districts has approached the zero point.
E. I.Dolgikh, Investments of pension savings in the system of mandatory pension insurance in The greater part of the funded component of the mandatory pension system, as before, is accumulated by a government asset manager (GAM), whose functions are performed by the USSR Bank for Foreign Trade (Vneshekonombank). As of the beginning of 2006, the value of the pension savings invested by the government asset manager amounted to 176.5 billion roubles, while the total volume of pension savings administered by private asset managers (PAM) was 5.6 billion roubles (3 %). Another 2 billion roubles (1 %) was transferred by citizens to the Non-Government Pension Fund (NGPF).
Simultaneously, yet another 91.7 billion roubles was accounted for by the insurance contributions earmarked to be part of the funded component of labor pension collected by the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation (PFR) but not yet transferred into the trusteeship management of asset managers or the PFR. Out of this sum, more than 80 billion roubles was invested by the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation (PFR) in government securities. During the first half of 2006, another 40.7 billion roubles was received by the PFR as part of the funded component of labor pension. The amount of funds invested by the PFR in government securities did not undergo any important changes20.
By late 2006, the value of the pension savings invested by the government asset manager (Vneshekonombank) had exceeded 267 billion roubles, having increased during that year by 90.8 billion roubles (51%).
This growth was mostly produced by the funds transferred during the year from the PFR (83.5 billion roubles, or 92% of the growth of managed funds). The market value of the assets into which pension savings had been invested by private asset managers amounted to 9.5 billion roubles, having increased in a year by 64 % (including the monies transferred over the year from the PFR - 2.97 billion roubles, or 77 %)21.
The structure of investments of the Vneshekonombank and the aggregate investment portfolio of all private asset managers as of the end of 2005 and 2006, as well as of the end of Q Ш 2006, is shown in Fig. 1-6.
Monies at credit inRF government seMonies at credit in- stitutions, in foreign Other curities, denominated currencies stitutions, in roubles 1% in foreign currencies 2% 14% 10% RF roubledenominated government securities 73% Fig. 1. The structure of the investment portfolio of the government asset manager ( Vneshekonombank), as of the end of 2005.
Federal Law “On the budget of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation for the year 2007”, Vestnik [Herald] of the PFR No 3 for 2006.
The data concerning the NGPF have not been published yet. In the Federal Law “On the budget of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation for the year 2007”, the PFR made a preliminary estimation of the amount of pension savings as of the end of 2006 as being equal to 345.3 billion roubles, which constitutes slightly more than 1% of GDP. As of January 2006, the corresponding index was 255.9 billion roubles.
RF government se-curities, Monies at credit in-stitutions, Other denominated in foreign in foreign currencies Monies at credit in-stitutions, 3% currencies 3% in roubles 7% 10% RF rouble-denominated govern-ment securities 77% Fig. 2. The structure of the investment portfolio of the government asset manager ( Vneshekonombank), as of the end of Q III 2006.
Monies at credit in-stitutions, in foreign currencies Monies at credit in-stitutions, Other 2% in roubles 2% RF government se-curities, 8% denominated in foreign currencies 10% RF rouble-denominated govern-ment securities 78% Fig. 3. The structure of the investment portfolio of the government asset manager ( Vneshekonombank), as of the end of депозиты Other Monies on ac-counts RF government 6% 9% of credit institutions securities 1% 15% Bonds of Rus-sian economic societies 20% Shares Municipal bonds Subfederal bonds 19% 3% 27% Fig. 4. The structure of the investment portfolio of private asset managers as of the end of 2005.
Monies on ac-counts Other депозиты RF government of credit institutions 9% 6% securities 2% 12% Bonds of Rus-sian economic societies Subfederal bonds Municipal bonds Shares 18% 28% 4% 21% Fig. 5. The structure of the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset managers as of the end of Q III 2006.
RF government Monies on ac-counts securities of credit institutions Other депозиты 10% 1% 6% 7% Subfederal bonds 23% Municipal bonds Bonds of Rus-sian 2% economic societies Shares 22% 29% Fig. 6. The structure of the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset managers as of the end of 2006.
RRb USD 1,2 1,1,1 1,1 0,0,9 USD RRb Source: Finmarket Fig.7. Prices of RF eurobonds FED-30.
Estimations made by: the Federal Service for Financial Markets, the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation, Vneshekonombank.
As seen on these diagrams, the structure of pensions savings invested by the government asset manager did not display any serious changes over the year. The share of monies not invested in securities decreased in the investment portfolio of the government asset manager (the rouble-denominated monies at credit institu 11.01.09.02.15.03.14.04.17.05.16.06.14.07.11.08.09.09.07.10.08.11.08.12.20.01.17.02.22.03.19.04.22.05.21.06.21.07.18.08.18.09.23.10.22.214.171.124.tions) decreased from 14 % to 8 %. Because of this, the share of government rouble-denominated securities increased (from 73 % to 78 %).
The share of eurobonds in the investment portfolio of the government asset manager was 10 % - both at the beginning and the end of the year. However, during the year it sometimes became lower than that level (as seen in Figure 2, as of the end of Q III 2006 this index was 7 %).
For the government asset manager, the unfavorable dynamics of the prices of eurobonds became one of the factors determining the decreasing rate of return. As seen in Fig. 7, the prices of the biggest issue of Russian eurobonds in the first half-year 2006 displayed a downward trend, especially when denominated in roubles. While in the year’s beginning their rouble-denominated price was 32.4 roubles, toward mid-year it became 28.6 roubles. The subsequent adjustment failed to return the prices to the level of 2005: by late 2006, the average price was less than 29 roubles.
Over the year, the share of bonds issued by the Federal Government (OFZ) in the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset managers decreased from 15 % to 10 %, which, no doubt, reflects the trend of that instrument’s declining rate of return (see Fig. 8).
% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2005 between 90 days and 1 year more than 1 year Source: RF CB Fig 8. Average weighted interest rates on the GKO – OFZ market In this connection, in contrast to the government asset manager, private asset managers do not invest in the government securities of the Russian Federation denominated in foreign currencies. On the whole, the proportion of securities with fixed rates of return (federal, subfederal, municipal, corporate bonds) in the aggregate investment portfolio of private asset managers as of the end of 2005 amounted to 64 %, as of the end of Q III 2006 – 62 %; by the year’s end it declined to 57 %.
| ... | 8
| ... | 14