DOI: 10.33917/es-5.197.2024.50-55

The article dwells on some current aspects of foreign direct investment (FDI) migration in Russia and abroad. The aim of the study is an attempt to theoretically reassess the role of monetary and credit mechanisms of FDI. The article provides information on the trends and pressing development problems of Russian FDI exports into the countries of Eurasian region and BRICS. According to the research, restrictive monetary policy in Russia is a significant obstacle to economic growth, foreign economic relations and FDI exports. Many economic indicators of the Russian Federation are negatively affected by the high key rate of the Bank of Russia. However, due to monopolistic structure of the Russian economy and many other factors, the restrictive monetary policy of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation often causes not only suppression of inflation and the increase in the production competitiveness, but excessive enrichment of a number of companies, banks and individuals at the expense of the economy as a whole. In the long term, in order to stimulate foreign direct investment, it seems feasible for the Bank of Russia to gradually shift from a restrictive monetary policy to a stimulating one, including for the purpose of optimal development of Russian FDI exports into the countries of the Eurasian region and BRICS.

References:

1. UNCTAD. World Investment Report. 2023. New York, United Nations, available at: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/wir2023_keymessages_en.pdfRRR

2. IMF. World Economic Outlook. Washington, DC. April, 2024, available at: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2024/04/16/world-economicoutlook-april-2024

3. Tatuzov V. Contemporary global economic crisis: Some conclusions for Russia and BRICS (taking into account Kondratieff long waves). BRICS Journal of Economics, 2020, no 1, pp. 25–40, available at: https://doi.org/10.38050/2712-7508-2020-8

4. Stiglitz J., Regmi I. The Causes and Responses to Today’s Inflation. Roosevelt Institute, 2022, available at: https://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/ uploads/2022/12/RI_CausesofandResponsestoTodaysInflation_Report_202212.pdf

5. Key Rate Statistics. 2024. CBR, available at: https://www.cbr.ru/eng/hd_base/KeyRate/

6. СBR: Inflation and Consumer Sentiment. Inflation and Consumer Sentiment, 2024, no 4(88), available at: https://www.cbr.ru/Collection/Collection/ File/49132/Infl_exp_24-04_e.pdf

7. Macroeconomic survey of the Bank of Russia. October, 2024. CBR, available at: https://www.cbr.ru/eng/statistics/ddkp/mo_br/

8. FDI Database. 2024. New York, UNCTAD, available at: https://unctadstat.unctad.org/datacentre/dataviewer/US.FdiFlowsStock

9. The State Council on further optimizing the environment for foreign investment. Opinions on increasing efforts to attract foreign investment. Guo Fa, 2023, no 11, available at: https://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/202308/content_6898048.htm

10. FDI database. Paris, OECD, 2024, available at: https://data.oecd.org/fdi/fdi-flows.htm

DOI: 10.33917/es-2.188.2023.50-55

Examines the monetary policy features in the context of the investment agenda. Current policy of the Bank of Russia is analyzed. Business profitability accounting in the monetary policy of the financial regulator contribute to the growth of Russian companies’ investment activity.

References:

1. Lutsenko S.I. Dokhodnost’ biznesa i denezhno-kreditnaya politika [Profitability of Business and Monetary Policy]. Strategicheskie resheniya i riskmenedzhment, 2022, no 4, pp. 326–332.

2. Konstitutsiya Rossiiskoi Federatsii (prinyata vsenarodnym golosovaniem 12 dekabrya 1993 g. s izmeneniyami, odobrennymi v khode obshcherossiiskogo golosovaniya 1 iyulya 2020 g.) [The Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on 12/12/1993 with amendments approved during the all-Russian vote on 07/01/2020)]. Ofitsial’nyi sait Prezidenta RF, available at: http://www.kremlin.ru/acts/constitution.

3. Opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo suda RF ot 14 dekabrya 2000 g. no 268-O [Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of December 14, 2000 No. 268-O]. Vestnik Konstitutsionnogo suda RF, 2001, no 2.

4. Opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo suda RF ot 15 yanvarya 2003 g. no 45-O [Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of January 15, 2003 No. 45-O]. Vestnik Konstitutsionnogo suda RF, 2003, no 3.

5. Federal’nyi zakon ot 10 iyulya 2002 g. no 86-FZ “O Tsentral’nom banke Rossiiskoi Federatsii (Banke Rossii)” [Federal Law of July 10, 2002 No. 86-FZ “On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)”]. Sobranie zakonodatel’stva RF, 2002, no 28.

6. Osnovnye napravleniya edinoi gosudarstvennoi denezhno-kreditnoi politiki na 2023 god i period 2024 i 2025 godov (utv. Bankom Rossii) [The main directions of the unified state monetary policy for 2023 and the period of 2024 and 2025 (approved by the Bank of Russia)]. Konsul’tantPlyus, available at: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_430425.

7. Informatsiya Banka Rossii ot 24 maya 2019 g. “MVF nazval targetirovanie inflyatsii i gibkii obmennyi kurs odnimi iz klyuchevykh predposylok dlya povysheniya potentsiala rosta rossiiskoi ekonomiki” [Information from the Bank of Russia dated May 24, 2019 “The IMF called inflation targeting and a flexible exchange rate one of the key prerequisites for increasing the growth potential of the Russian economy”]. Vestnik Banka Rossii, 2019, no 34.

8. Informatsionnoe soobshchenie Banka Rossii ot 21 noyabrya 2019 g. “Missiya MVF zayavila o vazhnosti sokhraneniya v Rossii prochnoi makroekonomicheskoi osnovy” [Information message of the Bank of Russia dated November 21, 2019 “The IMF mission declared the importance of maintaining a solid macroeconomic foundation in Russia”]. Vestnik Banka Rossii, 2019, no 74.

9. Prikaz Minsel’khoza Rossii ot 19 marta 2014 g. no 83 “Ob utverzhdenii otraslevoi tselevoi programmy “Razvitie khlebopekarnoi promyshlennosti Rossiiskoi Federatsii na 2014–2016 gody” [Order of the Ministry of Agriculture of Russia dated March 19, 2014 no. 83 “On approval of the sectoral target program “Development of the baking industry of the Russian Federation for 2014-2016”]. Konsul’tantPlyus, available at: https://www.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc&base=EXP&n=582610#8c8RoZTUXZLWGs3n.

DOI: 10.33917/mic-2.103.2022.5-38

Monetary policy is the most important instrument of economic growth policy, but the influence of any instrument may weaken or strengthen over time. We will designate this state as the cumulative effect of monetary policy. The purpose of the study is to determine the cumulative effect of monetary policy, with the identification of the effectiveness of its measures in ensuring the growth of the Russian economy. The methodology of the study consists of monetary theory, structural analysis of the money supply, the principle of «goals-tools» of economic policy and correlation and regression analysis, which allow to identify the presence of the cumulative effect of monetary policy, to determine its impact on relevant macroeconomic goals: GDP growth and inflation.

The result of the study is the application of the introduced indicators of the sensitivity of macro-policy goals to monetary policy instruments, representing a picture of the weakening of the influence of monetary policy on the growth of the Russian economy. The increasing monetization was accompanied, in particular, by a decrease in the growth rate of the Russian economy, the unfolding of a recession, the consequences of which affect the dynamics of economic development, while maintaining a tight monetary policy option – with an increase in the key interest rate. The structural analysis of the money supply for the M2 aggregate made it possible to identify those components that, with an increase, slow down growth and reduce inflation, as well as to determine the closeness of the relationship of the interest rate with the changing components of the money supply. The assessment of the cumulative effect of monetary policy on two goals of macroeconomic development – growth and inflation, and two monetary policy instruments – the M2 money supply and the key interest rate, confirmed the existence of a negative cumulative effect of the policy for the growth goal and a positive cumulative effect on the inflation rate. For two purposes at once, the positive cumulative effect of monetary policy is confirmed only for the period 2016-2018 in the interval 2001-2020. Thus, monetary policy, firstly, ensured the containment of inflation out of connection with growth, and secondly, provided different cumulative effects for different purposes – due to the different sensitivity of the target to the instruments.

The prospect of the study is seen in the creation of some kind of aggregated indicator that would allow taking into account the overall impact on the dynamics of the entire set of monetary policy measures, and not separately by goals and instruments, as presented in this study.

References:

1.       Glazyev S.Yu. A leap into the future. Russia in new technological and world economic structures. Moscow: Knizhny Mir, 2018. 768 p. (In Russ.).

2.      Glazyev S.Yu. Lessons of the next Russian revolution: the collapse of a liberal utopia and a chance for an «economic miracle». Moscow: Publishing House «Ekonomicheskaya Gazeta», 2011. 576 p. (In Russ.).

DOI: 10.33917/es-5.171.2020.136-143

Monetary policy currently pursued by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is a reflection of external market conditions. Regulatory approaches should, in particular, help reduce the dependence of monetary policy on external factors — such as oil prices, foreign loans, access to foreign markets, etc. This is not about completely isolating the monetary sphere of the Russian Federation from parameters and the external environment. It is required to refuse close, automatic communication with the given parameters. It is necessary to increase the stability of the monetary system of the Russian Federation and the economy as a whole in relation to external shocks. This can be done through more active use of a wide range of tools available to the regulator. These include monetary and regulatory mechanisms (interest rates, reserve requirements, foreign exchange positions, etc.), gold reserves, verbal interventions, etc., which can have a stimulating effect on economic growth. The high volatility of the ruble now observed makes it extremely difficult for enterprises to plan and forecast, thereby making it impossible for the normal course of investment processes and expanded reproduction. In order to use monetary mechanisms to stimulate economic growth and eliminate the negative effects of current monetary policy (in particular, implemented since autumn 2014), a departure from inflation targeting and free floating of the ruble exchange rate is necessary. At the same time, it is obviously necessary to abandon many components or closely related elements (for example, “monetary contraction”). In addition, steps will be needed to stabilize the foreign exchange market, which would have positive effects (falling volatility, lower inflation, etc.). Under current conditions, with limited access to external financial resources, it is important to use mechanisms  for generating financial flows based on internal sources. In other words, the monetary base should be formed due to internal factors, and not depend on the dynamics of energy prices. In previous years, the main emphasis in the Russian economy was placed on the external sphere as a source of growth financing. Restricting access to external cheap financial resources (due to low oil prices, sanctions, etc.), as well as continuing geopolitical tensions with regard to Russia, reduce the possibilities for implementing longterm investment projects in the economy. This increases the relevance of national mechanisms and sources of formation of the resource base (including long) necessary to refinance previously taken loans, as well as to implement structural changes in the Russian economy.

DOI: 10.33917/es-8.166.2019.24-29

The Russian economy needs in adequate financial policy in the environment when other countries use actively financial stimulation measures, among which are protectionist measures, aimed at the growth of activity and defend of national economy. Contemporary financial protectionist measures often are not subject of international conventions that increase international trade and capital flow transparency. Countries use non-market mechanisms to support their national business in the competitive environment. Such mechanisms entail risks and opportunities for countries, as well as for business (large business in the first place). It’s necessary for Russian regulators to consider thoroughly approaches of other countries and broaden instruments they use

DOI: 10.33917/es-8.166.2019.58-65

Today, the European Union (EU) is facing many challenges in the economic and financial sphere. Europeans are becoming less gullible with EU institutions and less tolerant of supranational interference in domestic politics. As a result, the process of European integration is gradually being modified. It was assumed that the process of economic integration, making Europeans more interdependent, should also lead to cultural assimilation and deeper political integration. Was the project too ambitious, given that Europeans are sufficiently heterogeneous in their economic interests, beliefs and sociocultural values to form a successful political union? Or are current difficulties a consequence of the inefficiency of supranational institutions? And how has the process of European economic integration affected cultural assimilation? All of these issues are becoming increasingly relevant as European integration develops

DOI: 10.33917/es-5.163.2019.58-69

To answer the question “Whither goest thou, Russia?”, the authors analyzed the period of the neoliberal reformation in the social and economic aspects. They summed up the political confrontation that had taken place in the “tumultuous” 1990s and identified the main trends towards the integral development of the Russian Federation for the near to medium terms. A situation that first occurred in the country, when the systems scientific and mental approaches are not in the binary opposition, but they are interacting research technologies, holds out hope for a success in studying the complicated actors of social life. In the authors’ opinion, for Russia’s successful development one can need a sovereignty of the State and society, to support creative directions in the intellectual sphere, to return the masses to active politics and to restore a direct and honest dialogue between the Government and civil society, otherwise there would be no way to save a considerable stratum of the population from a metacognitive bias with regard to their hope for a social and just transformation of society

On March 1, 2018 President of Russia V.V. Putin in his annual address to the Federal Assembly said: “To move forward, to develop dynamically we must expand the space of freedom, strengthen the institutions of democracy, local government, structures of the civil society, courts and be a country open to the world”. However, Russia’s experience of the last quarter of the century shows that in fact, having opened to the world and strengthening democracy, we have only lost resources, dispersed and lost forces and almost lost “the will for daring labor”. The poor people are far away from daring work, they hardly survive with pasta and potatoes, the rich are bogged down in hedonism and consider “this country” only as a source of superprofits, and the power is wrapping the absence of a real working strategy and its own political will in beautiful verbal covers speaking about democracy, a free market and endless long-term and medium-term strategies and programs that have never been implemented. To practice the strategy of opening to the world, when the United States have already declared to all, in point of fact, a trade war, to put it mildly, is short-sighted. Yet no country has succeeded in creating or reviving industry without protecting its own producer. Is a new industrialization possible in such conditions and who can and should become its driving force?

The subject of the study was the problem of elaborating the economic growth policy in Russia. The economy’s exit from recession requires justification of government policy measures contributing not only to overcome the crisis, but also to bring the economy to a path of sustainable economic growth at a given rate. The article deals with positions of economists, representing two major camps in their views on the economic policy of growth — expansionists and restrictionists. The first are in favor of active stimulation of the economy by means of budgetary and monetary policy, while the latter profess policy of cutting expenditures and carrying out individual reforms which, in their view, will improve the quality of economy functioning (judicial reform, privatization, etc.). Applying comparative analysis, based on the facts of economic growth and the crisis in Russia, the author substantiates the necessity of forming a new model of growth for our country, indicates strategic directions of such policy and presents scientific arguments that confirm this choice. For example, it is shown that for promoting investment in the first phase of the exit from recession it is necessary not only to build-up the rate of investment, but to stimulate aggregate consumption and to restore the level of citizens’ incomes. The existing choice between expansion and restriction as types of policy is not so unequivocal, because there are serious constraints on monetary expansion, and to consider this kind of policy in Russia apart from other systemic effects that should be commensurate with this policy model while implementing it, is inappropriate. Economic policy of a new growth should be based on the presence of feedback and influences in the economic system and should correctly evaluate the current status against established strategic guidelines.

The article shows the consequences of the RF Central Bank current monetary policy, analyzes its theoretical prerequisites and the results of its application in practice. In particular, the authors consider the differences between the inflation targeting monetary policy, which is carried out in Russia, and the experience of its application in the EU and the USA. Particular attention is paid to the Central Bank activities during devaluation in 2014 – 2015, immediate consequences for the various sectors of the Russian economy of the measures taken are analyzed in detail. The authors also propose fundamentally different approach to pursuing this policy, necessary to overcome negative results of the previous actions of the Bank of Russia. These steps mentioned in the article imply introduction of a new emission model, transformation of the Russian ruble in the world currency, increasing stability of its exchange rate.