In late 2005, effective demand for industrial products began to grow, and this growth was sufficiently intensive. Russian industry had not been demonstrating such good results at a yearТs end for a long time. Higher rates of growth in sales (before they were cleared of seasonality) in December were registered in 1999. Af ter it had been cleared of seasonality, the balance of changes in this basic index in creased at once by 6 p. p and became equal to +9 %. No such intensive sales growth had been observed during the previous 9 months of 2005. In January 2006, growth in effective demand for industrial products continued. Of course, the initial data demonstrated an absolute decrease in sales, but the intensity of decrease turned out to be less strong than in January 2005 or 2004. After clearance of sea sonality, the balance became positive: demand was still growing, and even more intensively than in November Ц December 2005. Growth in demand for industrial products continued in February, despite the pessimism of the official statistics and the spell of extreme freezing weather. In March, the intensity of its changes (before clearance of seasonality) was + 20 p. p., which is the second high for the whole pe riod of post default growth (Fig. 14). A more intensive growth in sales after was observed only in March 2005 ( + 25 p. p.). An increasing rate of growth in sales continued in April.
BALANCE --MONTHS -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Fig. 14. Monthly dynamics of demand in 2002 Ц (balance = % growth Ц % decrease) Source: Hereinafter in this section all the figures and tables have been prepared on the basis of the results of surveys.
Section The Real Sector The balance of changes in this index reached its 12 month high and became +12 p. p. (cleared of seasonality). The elimination of the accidental component yielded an even more impressive result, such as had not been observed since late 2000.
In May 2006, the dynamics of effective demand avoided its traditional dra matic fall. The rates of sales growth lowered only slightly (by initial data) by com parison with April and displayed the best values against the corresponding months of all the years of follow up (since 1993). When cleared of seasonality, the results of May 2006 demonstrated an absolute high: no growth in sales of this intensity has ever been seen during all the 14 years of surveying.
In June, growth in effective demand demonstrated yet another record. By all the indices (initial, cleared of seasonality and accidental fluctuations), the intensity of sales growth became higher than all the previous peak values and reached yet another absolute high (Fig. 14, 15). At the branch level, sales continued to decline only in the light industry.
% -----1/1993 1/1995 1/1997 1/1999 1/2001 1/2003 1/2005 1/Fig. 15. Changes of effective demand, cleared of seasonality (balance = % growth Ц % decrease) However, in July the intensity of growth in demand became lower. The initial data (before cleared of seasonality and accidental fluctuations) demonstrated a reduction in the balance of sales changes (or growth rate) from 28 to 17 p. p. But the latter value in terms of the year 2006 is not disastrous Ц it is closer to the aver age rate of growth in sales during the 6 preceding months. As for the June index, it was found to be an absolute high for the whole period of follow up. After cleared of seasonality, the fall in demand growth in July became equal to only 5 p. p. (from RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks to 16). After the elimination of accidental fluctuations, demand growth once again demonstrated the previous record values of sales growth rate.
The data on the dynamics of demand in August demonstrated a further slow down in the growth of sales of industrial products. The growth rate of this index (balance of changes) became lower by further 5 p. p. after it had been cleared of seasonality. During July August, the intensity of growth in demand УlostФ a total of p. p. The balance was still far from being negative (that is, an absolute fall in sales), but the obvious УdepartureФ from the high values seen in May and June was disap pointing, for the time being Ц only for the government and analysts. As for industry proper, the satisfaction with sales remains there at the level of 56 %, which means that the majority of Russian enterprises were, nevertheless, satisfied with their product sales volumes.
The intensity of sales growth in September was no more declining, and in stead demonstrated growth, as estimated by enterprises in industry on the whole, by 3 p. p., mainly due to growth in the woodwork and timber industry and in the food industry. This index, however, did not change in machine building.
In October, the intensity of demand growth did not display any fundamental changes. In industry as a whole, the rates of sales growth (when cleared of season ality) remained at the previous monthТs level. A slowdown in demand growth (sometimes even down to an absolute low) was registered only at the branch level:
in the production of garments, timber and woodwork, cellulose, paper and card board, in metallurgy, and in electrical machine building and electrical equipment.
In November, the growth rates of sales of industrial products, as estimated by enterprises, remained at the level of July Ц October. When cleared of seasonality, the intensity of demand growth in industry as a whole during that period was be tween 12 and 15 b. p. The November value of this index was 14 b p. Sales growth was registered in all the branches of industry, with the exception of the production of textiles, garments, electrical equipment and motor car industry. The highest rates of demand growth (when cleared of seasonality) were observed in the pro duction of cellulose, paper, timber, machines and equipment, radio and communi cations equipment, and means of transportation.
As demonstrated by computed growth rates (or balances of changes) of de mand by six month periods, the year 2006 was, indeed, very УcomfortableФ for Russian industry in terms of demand dynamics (Table 34). During the first six months, the intensity of demand growth was 10 p. p. Ц which is not the very best result in seven years (in the second half year 2000, this value was 11 p. p.), but the second half year demonstrated impressive results: the balance became as high as 15 p. p., which is a record high for the whole follow up period.
Section The Real Sector Table Changes in effective demand by six month periods in 2000 Ц Year 6 months Growth No change Fall No answer Balanceс 2000 1 22 65 12 2 2 22 65 11 2 2001 1 18 61 18 3 2 19 65 14 2 2002 1 15 58 25 1 Ц 2 20 62 18 1 2003 1 21 58 20 1 2 22 62 14 2 2004 1 22 59 18 1 2 20 65 14 1 2005 1 21 61 17 1 2 17 66 16 1 2006 1 25 59 15 1 2 25 64 9 2 The average annual data on the changes in effective demand by branch (Ta ble 35) have shown that the most rapid growth in 2006 was demonstrated by sales of finished metal products, means of transportation, leather and footwear, as well as medical equipment and measuring appliances. A decline in sales was observed only in woodwork and woodwork products. Textiles demonstrated rather a stabili zation of sales volumes that their decline (especially after five years of a continual downward trend). Also noteworthy is the onset of a rather intensive growth of sales of furniture after two years of declining demand. The food industry in recent years has been demonstrating stable but low rates of growth in demand for its products.
Table Average Annual Balances of Changes (Growth Rates) in Effective Demand, by Branch, in 2000 Ц 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Production of foodstuffs 0 Ц5 Ц2 4 3 3 Production of textiles 1 Ц7 Ц11 Ц4 Ц11 Ц5 ЦProduction of garments 8 5 Ц3 Ц5 Ц7 Ц6 Production of leather and footwear 0 9 Ц8 0 Ц7 7 Timber processing and woodwork 13 0 Ц2 4 5 Ц4 ЦProduction of cellulose, paper, cardboard 1 Ц27 5 5 5 0 Chemical industry 14 2 0 0 9 13 Production of rubber and plastic products 17 Ц3 Ц9 9 10 1 Production of other non metal mineral products 8 0 Ц9 1 0 0 Metallurgy 13 Ц3 Ц9 8 7 8 Production of finished metal products 13 Ц4 4 5 Ц8 1 Production of machines and equipment 10 9 Ц12 4 7 0 Production of electrical machines and equipment 10 Ц3 2 12 6 2 RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Production of radio, television and communications equipment 16 10 10 1 Ц2 Ц10 Production of medical equipment, measuring appliances, optical 2 2 Ц8 7 0 0 equipment Production of motor cars, trailers and half trailers 26 10 Ц10 14 24 14 Production of vessels, aircraft and other means of transportation Ц2 0 9 6 2 7 Production of furniture 21 1 7 36 Ц10 Ц3 3.2.2. Influence of demand on the status of industrial enterprises Growth in demand for industrial products, which continued in 2006, resulted in growing sales volumes and made it possible for a greater number of enterprises to achieve normal volumes of sales of their products. On the average, the percent age of such estimations received in 2006 was 56 % (Table 36). This is an absolute high for the whole follow up period. Dissatisfaction with demand was noted in on the average at 40 % of enterprises (the absolute annual low). As a result, the dif ference between these two basic estimations of demand became the highest ever Ц 16 p. p. In other words, the prevalence in Russian industry of those enterprises that were satisfied with the demand for their products reached an unprecedented level.
Table Dynamics of basic estimations of effective demand volumes (% of number of respondents) Year Norm Below norm Difference in estimations 1993 37 55 Ц1994 14 82 Ц1995 14 84 Ц1996 8 91 Ц1997 12 85 Ц1998 10 88 Ц1999 25 72 Ц2000 33 64 Ц2001 35 62 Ц2002 32 65 Ц2003 45 51 Ц2004 53 45 2005 51 47 2006 56 40 The prevalence of those enterprises that were satisfied with demand was reg istered in 2006 for 10 successive months (Fig. 16), and only in January and Febru ary the estimations Уbelow normФ were more numerous (but only by 2 Ц 4 points). In the second half year the percentage of the answers УnormalФ demonstrated yet another monthly high Ц 67 %, and did not go below 60 % until the yearТs end. The previous record high (58 %) was exceeded by 9 p. p. As for the percentage of enter prises dissatisfied with demand, it did, quite naturally, go down to an absolute low: in Section The Real Sector September, only 29 % of such answers were registered in industry as a whole. The lowest value for 2005 was 39 %, and it also was registered in September.
% BELOW NORM NORM 1/1994 1/1996 1/1998 1/2000 1/2002 1/2004 1/Fig. 16. Dynamics of basic estimations of effective demand Last year, in terms of the basic indices of demand, became the best for Rus sian industry throughout the whole follow up period. It not only yielded the best dif ference between the basic estimations of demand, but the growth rates of sales in annual terms reached an absolute high. As a result, the 2006 УcoordinatesФ in the space of these two indices were better that the similar УcoordinatesФ of all past years (Fig. 17). As seen from the Figure, the coordinates of only two last years be long to a positive (by both coordinates) quadrant in the system of coordinates ap plied here. This means that industry, during that period only, was able, by increas ing sales, to achieve acceptable sales volumes. However, this part of the trajectory did not always demonstrate a positive trend of development. After 2004, when both coordinates became positive for the first time, the results of 2005 demonstrated a slight УdrawbackФ: a slowdown in demand growth resulted in lowering satisfaction with its volumes. However, both values remained positive, that is, demand was still growing, but slower than the enterprises had expected, which resulted in an insuffi cient increase of its volumes and a lower satisfaction with it.
RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ESTIMATIONS OF DEMAND 20 -60 -40 -20 0 20 -----BALANCES OF CHANGES IN DEMAND Fig. 17. Changes in the position of Russian industry in the space of basic demand indices in 1993 Ц The positive dynamics of demand was for the first time demonstrated by the 1999 surveys: then, the balance of changes (or rate of growth) for the first time be came positive. However, the volumes of sales were not yet high enough to yield the prevalence in industry of those enterprises that were satisfied with these volumes.
After the difference in estimations in 1998, which was Ц 78 p. p., in 1999 the differ ence went up quite noticeably (to Ц 48 p. p. ), but still remained negative. The rates of growth in demand remained positive in 2000 Ц 2001, but the achieved volumes were still not satisfactory from the point of view of a majority of Russian industrial enterprises. The difference in estimations was improving (at first to Ц 30, and then to Ц 27 p. p. ), but remained negative. At the same time, the year 2001 saw a slow down in the rates of growth in demand by comparison with 2000, and difference in estimations improved only slightly. The year 2002 became the most unpleasant for Russian enterprises during the post default period. The results of that year demon strated negative rates of demand growth and a negative difference in the estima tions of its volumes. The 2002 coordinates Уwent backФ to the negative quadrant.
The next year saw a substantial improvement of the situation in Russian industry, as shown by the system of coordinates applied here. Rates of growth in demand once again became positive, and the estimates of its volume approached zero very nearly. The latter value implies that the share of those who were satisfied with de mand levels became nearly equal to the share of the dissatisfied. There was just one last step to be made. And it was made in 2004.
The position of the majority of branches within the space of main indices of demand between 2005 and 2006 also improved. (Fig. 18). Almost all the industries Section The Real Sector (except the light industry) were placed, by the results of 2006, within the positive quadrant, that is, they displayed both growth of demand and a positive difference between its main estimations. Only the light industry failed to achieve a positive dif ference between the estimations of demand in 2006: there one still can observe the prevalence of those enterprises where normal demand volumes have not yet been achieved. Nevertheless, one doubtless achievement of that branch were the posi tive rates of demand growth in 2006 and better values of the difference between its main estimations.
ћатериалы этого сайта размещены дл€ ознакомлени€, все права принадлежат их авторам.
≈сли ¬ы не согласны с тем, что ¬аш материал размещЄн на этом сайте, пожалуйста, напишите нам, мы в течении 1-2 рабочих дней удалим его.