WWW.DISSERS.RU


...
    !

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 6 | 7 || 9 | 10 |   ...   | 39 |

Taking into account a poor investmentactivity of the past, it should be admitted that investments in stock capitaldo not correspond to the real needs for re-equipment and modernization ofproduction facilities, which affects the efficiency of economy. The problemof restructuring investments in favor of the industries producinggoods and services with a higher value added, which are able to providecompetitiveness for the Russian economy, has not been solved yet.

The increase in savings in economyaggravated the problem of savings transformation. Under very slow reformationperformance within financial sector the share of bank capital in real sectorinvestments remains very small. Manufacturers' own assets are still the mainsource of investments since the mechanism of inter-sectoral capital flow andaccumulation of gross savings for the purpose of development of competitiveeconomic sectors does not work.

The investment performance was affected bylow income of the population. The current level of domestic solvent demand inconsumption market limited the opportunities for goods and services productionto grow. Besides,the downturn in income growth rates and considerable rise inprices and tariffs for goods and services of natural monopolies began to exertnegative influence upon investments activity performance since the end of 2000.

In spite of a favorable combination ofcompetitive prices in the world market and devaluation effect, the investmentclimate did not change in 2001. The absence of structural reforms did not allowfor balancing the cooperation between financial and real economy sectors. Theinstability of legal field determined high risks and unfavorable business andinvestment atmosphere. The dearth of legal standard acts, which might guaranteethe protection of property rights, perfection of corporative management,facilitation of administrative control over the markets, and a highertransparency of economic operation, proves to be the factorconstraining investment activity of both domestic private and foreigncapital.

In this situation in 2001, investmentactivity was formed under the influence of diametrically opposite tendencies.On the one hand, the high investment growth rates and the augmentation ofdomestic sources of financing have been fixed, but, on the other hand, theestimates show that the capital outflow ratios in Russia have not decreased in2001.

Under the conditions of economic growth ithas become clear that investments management has not been correlated with thedynamic process of restructuring Russian economy. The formation of investmentmodel for the development of Russian economy within long-term governmentalstrategy for 2000-2001 is oriented towards the elimination of the givennegativefactors.

2.2 The situation in theindustrial sector1

The dynamics of theprincipal types of demand for the industrial product in the year 2001

The year 2001 became yet another year of arelatively favorable development of domestic industry after the 1998 default.On the whole the effective demand and the industrial output were stillgrowing, the non-monetary realization schemes continued to be displaced byother schemes, and the actual financial and economic situation of Russianindustrial enterprises was being improved. However during the past yeardomestic manufacturers were forced to go through three unfavorable periodsrelating to the problems with sales. The first occurred in January-Februarywhen surveys for the first time since the beginning of the year 1999demonstrated an absolute reduction in the sales of industrial products formoney. A slowdown in the effective demand growth began as early an in November2000, and in three months its growth rate fell by 29 balance points - to -11%.Only in March 2001 the sales growth rate again became positive but did notreach its previous figures. And in May a new slowing of the growth began whichresulted in a complete halt in the sales growth in June-July 2001. This was thesecond period when the problems with sales occurred in Russian industry. As aresult, the first half of the year turned out to be the worst period ever forRussian industry after the 1998 default (see Fig.18).

Figure 18

In the third quarter Russian industryovercame the negative trends that had been growing during the first half of theyear. In August the dynamics of the effective demand was reversed in principle:the surveys registered an upward surge in the sales rates. Nothing like thishad been seen during the preceding 9 months. The sales rate growth was noted inall the branches except for nonferrous metallurgy. But even there only a slowergrowth was observed, while none of the branches demonstrated an absolutereduction in the effective demand in August. In September the growth rate ofthe sales of industrial products for money continued to go up. The balanceincreased by another 4 points and reached the maximum value for the preceding11 months. In October the growth rate of the sales of industrial products formoney were demonstrating almost no changes. By the end of the year, Russianindustry for the third time experienced problems with sales. First, inNovember, the growth of the sales of industrial products for money was halted.The share of the responses about growing sales for money became the same as theshare of the responses concerning lowering sales. At the same time, 71% of theenterprises stated that their volume of sales for money remained as before. Areduction in the monetary demand was registered in all branches except thetimber, woodwork, pulp and paper and food industries. As for metallurgy, thechemical, petrochemical and construction materials producing industries, thesales for money demonstrated an absolute reduction. This situation had alreadybeen forecasted in September when the surveys reflected the most moderateexpectations concerning the growth of this parameter in 2001. In December thenegative trends in the dynamics of the sales of industrial products for moneybecame even more pronounced. While in November the responses concerning thegrowth and reduction of sales were approximately equal in number, inDecember the share of the responses stating a lowered effective demandwend up dramatically and became considerably higher than the share of theanswers stating that the sales for money had been on the rise. As a result,during the two months the balance of responses fell by 20 points and becamenegative - the effective demand began to go down. And the rate of saleslowering turned out to be the same as at the beginning of the year whenbusiness activity slows down during the New Year festivities.

The beginning of the year 2002 did notbring any cardinal changes into the actual dynamics of the basic indicescharacterizing the situation in industry. In January the reduction in effectivedemand that had begun one month before continued to develop further. The rateof the reduction of this parameter increased by another 4 balance points andreached -16%. This is the worst figure as compared to the three precedingyears. The growth of sales for money was preserved only in the electric powerindustry while in other branches the effective demand was going down. Thereduction in sales was especially rapid in the chemical and petrochemicalindustries, ferrous metallurgy and the construction materials producingindustry.

Despite the obvious slowing or halting ofthe growth in the effective demand, Russian enterprises were preferring toreduce the volumes of their non-monetary transactions. Throughout the year 2001the number of the answers reflecting a reduction in barter, bill and set-offoperations was greater than those reflecting their growth. This situation wasoccurring in all branches except the construction materials producing industry.Thus, in July a slight growth in barter was registered. At the same time themonth-to-month changes of these indices look more alarming. In the first halfof the year the surveys were registering slowing rates of the reduction inbarter, bill and set-off operations. In April the balances of the changes ofthese indices demonstrated the slowest reduction rate as far as these types oftransactions were concerned. In face of the falling sales rates this lookedquite natural - barter and other surrogates had already helped out Russianindustry before. In May the rates of the reduction in the volumes ofnon-monetary transactions showed a dramatic growth (mostly due to seasonalfluctuations) but later again became slower. The most consistent changes weredemonstrated by bill and set-off operations despite the resumed growth in salesfor money in August-September.

The attitude of enterprises towardnon-monetary transactions also changed. Before January 2001, there had been astable prevalence of the answers above the norm when estimating the bartervolumes. In April 2001 the balance became negative - the enterprises began tofeel the deficiency of the barter channels for realizing their completedproducts that had not been sold for money. The volumes of bill and set-offtransactions had been considered insufficient since April 2000 (when this indexwas first monitored). In July 2001 the insufficiency of the volumes of thesetransactions reached its maximum. Only the metallurgical enterprises consideredtheir volumes to be excessive.

On the whole, the volumes of allnon-monetary operations in Russian industry continued to decrease. The summarybalances of the changed volumes of barter, bill and set-off transactionsrelating to the sales of products can be obtained on the basis of two questionsincluded in the monthly survey questionnaire of the IET. The first questiondeals only with the barter volume changes, the second - with the changingvolumes of bill and set-off transactions. Let us explore a matrix ofcontingency M(Xt,Yt) where Xt represents the actual changes in barter demand insurvey t, Yt - the actual changes in bills and set-offs, (+) means growingindex, (-) decreasing index, (=) no changes:




Yt




+

=

-


+

++

+=

+-

M(Xt,Yt):

Xt =

=+

==

=-


-

-+

-=

--

The sum of the elements above the seconddiagonal of the matrix defines the share of those enterprises that experiencedthe growth of either both types of demand or the growth of either one of themwhile the other remained non-decreasing. The sum under the second diagonaldefines the share of those enterprises that experienced a reduction either ofboth types of demand or of either one of them while the other remainednon-increasing. The resulting sums are analogous to the answers to the questionabout the changes of the summary nonmonetary demand: increased, did notchange, decreased. Now the calculation of the traditional balances ofchanges is obvious (see Fig.19). On the whole, the intensity of the decrease ofthe volumes of non-monetary realization schemes throughout he year 2001 turnedout to be more stable than in the preceding year. The balances of changes ofthis index stayed within the interval -10..-15%, and only in December becamelower than -17%. In January 2002 the intensity of the decrease in non-monetarytransactions grew even more and resulted in growing forecasts of the changes ofsuch operations. The enterprises signal their preparedness to turn to barter,bills and set-offs once again if sales for money should go down.

Figure 19

The matrix approach to the analysis of theresults of conjecture surveys makes it possible to evaluate also theinteraction of the two types of demand (monetary and non-monetary) at themicrolevel. In this case the matrix of contingency between the questions aboutthe changes of the effective demand and the total non-monetary demand isconstructed - M(Xt,Yt), where Xtrepresents the actual changes in effective demand in survey t, Yt - theactual changes in total non-monetary demand, (+) means growing index, (-) -decreasing index, (=) - no changes:




Yt




+

=

-


+

++

+=

+-

M(Xt,Yt): t

Xt =

=+

==

=-


-

-+

-=

--

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 6 | 7 || 9 | 10 |   ...   | 39 |



2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .