Source: Federal State Statistics Service The level and the share of employers’ wages in the structure of the GDP had a prevailing influence on the social profile, including labor market. The typical aspect of the period of 2001 2006 was the tendency for the growth in the demand for labor force. Average annual number of the employed in the economy process in was equal to 68.9 mln. people in comparison with 64.5 mln. people in 2000. It is to be noted, that the change in labor force demand was determined by the shift of the employment to the kinds of activities which provide market services. The formation of this tendency at the initial stage of the economic growth restoration made a powerful effect on the quality of life and gave a stimulus for service sphere devel opment growth rate acceleration. However, against the background of industry growth rate slowdown and import supply acceleration this provoked a trend to the decrease in the average annual industrial and production staff number. In past three years the decrease in employment was observed in almost all branches of in dustry, the decrease in the number of workplaces being the most intensive in the processing industries. In 2005 the share of those employed in processing indus tries accounted for 17.2% of the average annual number of those employed in all RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks kinds of economic activities against 17.7% in 2004 and 18.8% in 2001. The com parison of the labor efficiency dynamics in different kinds of economic activities demonstrates a gradual slackening of the tendency for labor efficiency growth in the industry. With regard to labor efficiency growth rates manufacturing industries are considerably behind the extractive industries (Table 6).
Table The Dynamics of Labor Efficiency, as percentage to the preceding year 2003 2004 2005 2006* Economy as a whole 107.0 106.5 105.5 106. broken by kinds of economic activities:
Agriculture, hunting and forestry 106.0 106.2 100.2 No data Fishing and fish breeding 102.1 99.2 100.7 No data Minerals extraction 109.2 107.4 106.1 105. Manufacturing industries 108.8 107.5 105.6 104.Production and distribution of water, gas and electricity 103.7 100.1 103.9 103.Construction 105.3 106.9 105.9 108. Whole sale and retail trade; motor vehicles, motorcycles, house 109.8 108.9 107.2 106.hold appliances and articles of private use service Hotels and restaurants 100.3 100.4 112.2 No data Тtransport and communication 107.5 108.3 100.5 105. Operations with real estate, renting, provision of services 102.5 102.1 108.1 No data * Preliminary data.
Source: Federal State Statistics Service Low efficiency in factors of production use is one of the main causes of the decrease in competitive advantages of Russian goods (Fig.5). The growth of dis crepancy between the rate of labor productivity and wages in favor of the latter had the negative impact on the economic dynamics indices. Over 2000 2006 real ac crued wages increased by 2.57 times, while the labor productivity grew by 1.times. This rate of labor remuneration growth was accompanied by the decrease in gross economy profit in the structure of the GDP from 42.7% in 2000 to 35.7% in 2006.
In 2003 2004 it was observed that labor efficiency rates and wages rates were brought closer to each other in the environment of production rates acceleration.
However the influence of this process on the change of enterprises and organiza tions’ efficiency indices was extremely weak and unsTable. The increase in wages and population incomes was accompanied by the redistribution of incomes from the enterprises to the population and lead as a result to the increase in production costs and the decrease in production profitability. In 2004–2005 the dynamics of wages was on average 1.05 times ahead of the growth of labor efficiency, and in 2006 – 1.07 times. However the possibilities of further increase in costs for labor remuneration are more and more limited by the changes in competitive environ ment at goods markets due to ruble appreciation and the increase of pressure from the import.
Section The Real Sector Real w ages Labor efficiency Source: Federal State Statistics Service Fig. 5. The Dynamics of Labor Efficiency and Real Accrued Wages over 1999–2006, as percentage to the preceding year Due to the fact that the prevailing part of population income is formed by labor remuneration the problems of unemployment and provision of employment re tained their priority. The total number of unemployed, calculated by the methodol ogy of International Labor Organization, reduced from 8.9 mln. people (13.2% of economically active population) in 1998 to 5.6 mln. people (7.5%) in 2005 and 5.mln. people (7.1%) in 2006. Strain coefficient (number of unemployed people reg istered in the bodies of employment service per one position) decreased to 2.people in comparison with 2.5 people at the end of 2005. Simultaneously the ten dency for the increase in efficient use of working hours was observed. In 2005– 2006 the real duration of the working day throughout the economy as a whole in creased at the expense of the decrease in the number of part time workers and those having mandatory administrative leave. Besides, the trend for the reduction in duration of voluntary leaves was observed in accordance with existing legislation.
The average profitability of Russian economy tends to decrease. The profit ability of sold goods and services throughout the economy as a whole was equal to, according to the preliminary estimation, 13.1% against 13.5% in 2005 (Table 7).
The analysis of profits formation by the kinds of activities demonstrates that bal anced financial result was formed by 3/5 by economic activities connected with RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks goods production and by 2/5 by services provision. However inside the sectors the industries are distinguished that have a prevailing impact on the process of profit formation and use in the national economy.
The industry did not retain leading positions neither in the financial activity growth dynamics nor in the industry structure of incomes formation by the kinds of economic activities. The slowdown in industry financial results was initiated by the reserved dynamics of extractive industries productions. Balanced financial result of fuel fossils extraction in January November 2006 increased by 7.1% in comparison with the corresponding period of 2005. In processing industries against the back ground of production costs increase due to the growth of expenses for labor force, internal prices for mineral resources used as sources of power and transportation fees the situation is also unfavorable.
Table Profitability of Sold Goods, Production (Work, Services) by kinds of economic activity, as percentage 2003 2004 Economy as a whole 10.2 13.2 13.Including the kinds of economic activity:
Food, beverages and tobacco production 8.2 7.5 7.Textile and clothing industry 1.4 2.4 2.Leather, leather goods and footwear production 2.8 3.7 5.Woodwork and manufacture of articles 5.6 4.6 4.Pulp and paper production, publishing and editing 10.4 10.8 11.Coke and oil products production 15.5 22.3 21.Chemical industry 10.2 13.8 19.Rubber and plastic goods production 5.9 4.4 4.Other non metal mineral products production 10.5 12.0 12.Metallurgical production and finished metal fabrics 23.7 32.2 26.Machinery and equipment production 5.8 7.5 8.Electrical, electronic and optic equipment production 8.3 8.4 8.Transport vehicles and equipment production 9.8 7.8 6.Electricity, gas and water production and distribution 6.4 5.4 5.Construction 5.7 4.2 3.Whole sale and retail trade; motor vehicles, motorcycles, household appliances 8.9 11.3 9.and articles of private use service Transport and communication 15.3 13.4 14.Including communication 35.8 32.7 33.Financial activity 1.0 –0.3 5.Factors of the GDP and the Industry Added Value Economic Growth over 2004–2006 was characterized by a trend, which emerged in recent years, towards GDP growth rates slowdown. Whereas in 2003 GDP growth rates were 7.3%, in 2004 – 7.2%, and in 2005 – 6.4%, in 2006 GDP growth increased and was equal to 6.7%.
Section The Real Sector Breaking economic growth down by extensive (main growth factors – labor and capital) and intensive constituents (generalized estimation of which is the total factor efficiency TFE) enables to estimate growth quality, forecast further trends in the economy development.
According to the decomposition results the share of the GDP growth rates accounted for by the change in the main factor input increase: in 2003 their contribution was equal to 32.1%, in 2004 – 41.6%, and in 2006 – already 57.9%, the only exception being 2005, in which labor and capital inputs determined 29.9% of output growth rates.
In 2006 the increase in the output due to the main factors input was to a greater extent (by 58.6%) accounted for by the change in the level of funds par ticipating in the production. The increase in capital input is mainly determined by the increase of its load – in 2006 this component comprised 41.0% of output growth rates. Despite the increase in investments growth rates (13.5% in against 10.7% in 2005) the physical volume of the fixed assets varies but negligi bly, as the main part of investments is due to the renovation of existing facilities.
The increase in labor input is accounted for by the change in “reserves”, i.e.
the number of employed people. In 2006 the increase in the demand for labor force led to the increase in the employment level by 0.9%, this figure being, how ever, lower than employment growth rates in 2004 2005, so the contribution of la bor input decreased in 2006. It should be noted that the increase in the number of the people employed was provided by the service sector, whereas in manufactur ing sector the employment was decreasing. The change in the time worked out determines only 0.3% of the GDP growth rates, which exceeds the level of 2005, which was characterized by the decrease in the number of hours worked out by one employer a year, but is considerably less than the figure of 2004, when the contribution of this labor input component determined 8.3% output growth rates.
In contrast to the GDP growth rates, the dynamics of TFE growth rates did not experience the change of the trend towards growth rates slowdown: efficiency growth rates in 2006 were equal to 2.82 %, which is more than 1.5 times lower than the level of 2003, in which the corresponding figure was equal to 4.96%, i.e. on av erage the decrease in TFE growth rates over the period was equal to 0.71 p.p. At the same time the contribution of TFE to the output growth rates decreased from 67.9% in 2003 to 58.4% in 2004 and 42.1% in 2006, the exception being 2005, when the change in the efficiency determined 70.1% of the output growth rates.
The monetary nature of the indices used for estimation makes TFE estimations de pendant on the situation factors and especially on oil prices. On exclusion of oil prices growth component from the TFE figure, efficiency growth free from the Method of economic growth decomposition is presented in the book: Factors of the economic growth, “Scientific work” series, № 70, IET, 2003.
Preliminary data – estimation of the fixed assets volume growth in 2006 is based on the assumption that the coefficient of fixed assets retirement and the share of investments in their renewal are con stant. The estimation of the extent of facilities load is based on the assumption that the share of en ergy consumed in the volume of the production output is constant.
Estimation for the year is based on the data for January September RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks situation at the world markets becomes considerably lower. The contribution of technological component into the GDP growth in 2006 makes up for 18 % (50% – in 2003, 13% – in 2004 and 0% – in 2005).
Decomposition of the GDP annual growth rates and Gross Added Value by the kinds of economic activity in 2004–2006.
of which: of which:
The Factors The extent GAV TFE Capi Time Fixed input Labor number of the tal worke assets of em facili * ** d out level ployed ties *** load 7.20 2.99 1.02 0.43 0.60 1.97 0.54 1.43 4.Total throughout the 6.40 1.91 0.11 0.30 –0.20 1.81 0.68 1.12 4.economy 6.70 3.88 0.30 0.28 0.02 3.58 0.84 2.74 2.8.60 0.25 –4.04 –4.04 – 4.28 1.30 2.98 8.Minerals extraction 0.90 1.35 –0.38 –0.38 – 1.73 1.38 0.36 –0.2.10 –0.07 –1.28 –1.39 0.11 1.21 1.21 – 2.6.70 –1.31 –3.82 –3.82 – 2.51 0.58 1.92 8.Manufacturing indus 5.70 4.05 –0.45 –0.45 – 4.50 0.83 3.67 1.tries 4.90 –0.32 –1.32 –1.36 0.04 1.00 1.00 – 5.2.00 –3.98 –3.72 –3.72 – –0.26 –0.26 0.00 5.Electricity, waste and gas production and 1.30 0.12 0.34 0.34 – –0.22 –0.22 0.00 1.distribution 2.60 0.24 0.14 0.09 0.05 0.09 0.09 – 2.* per one worker.
** on the basis of data on the physical volume of fixed assets *** The estimation of the change in facilities utilization throughout the whole economy is base don the data for electricity consumption, in industrial production – on the data for average annual manu facturing capacity of organization, producing different type of goods.
Source: Federal State Statistics Service.
For the enterprises of the minerals extraction sector, as well as for the econ omy as a whole, the decrease in GAV growth rates is observed in 2005 with some acceleration in 2006. Furthermore, the decrease in GAV growth rates in this kind of the economic activity in 2005 in comparison with 2006 (0.9% against 8.6%) as well as its increase in 2006 (up to the level of 2.1%) is more significant than in the case of the GDP. In 2004 2006 the enterprises involved in minerals extraction are char acterized by the biggest decrease in output growth rates: on average over the pe riod GAV growth rates decrease by 3.25 p.p.
The final balance left after exclusion of efficiency component, which is accounted for by the dynam ics of world prices for oil, is referred to as the technological component.
For each type of the economic activity the first line gives growth decomposition in 2004, second line – in 2005, third line – in 2006.
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.