3.4 Structure of GRP production

Structure of GRP production (in % of total)

These tables characterize the contribution of the sphere of material production and services to the creation of GRP. The following table provides a description of the sectoral structure of the GRP of the republic in the context of industries that, over the period from 1995 to 2002, played a significant role in increasing or decreasing the volume of GRP production in Buryatia.

Analyzing the sectoral structure of the produced GRP, we can draw the following conclusions:

industry accounts for the largest share in the structure of GRP production. The share of this main producer decreased from 32.3% in 1995 to 26.3% in 2002. An increase in the share was observed in agriculture and forestry (by 1.0 and 0.1 percentage points, respectively). During this period, the share of public utilities increased by 1.4 p.p., trade and commercial activities for the sale of goods and services increased by 1.1 p.p., while the share of construction decreased by 0.7 p.p., transport and communications by 7 p.p., housing by 0.1 p.p.

since 2000, some economic growth has been observed in the republic (see table 1). This growth is due primarily to the growth of industrial production. In 2002 compared to 2001 Gross value added in industry grew by 34.9%, non-production consumer services - by 60.4%, communications - by 14.1%.

Sectoral structure of GRP (in % of total)

3.5 Dynamics of per capita actual final consumption of households in the Republic of Belarus,Siberian Federal District and Russia

The actual final consumption of households (hereinafter - consumption), calculated per capita, as well as the average per capita production of GRP, is one of the main indicators characterizing the economic situation of the region and the standard of living of the population. The volume and dynamics of this indicator methodologically depend both on the volume of GRP production in the region and on the level of its use, that is, the expenditure on final consumption.

To obtain generalizing indicators of dynamics, we determine the average values ​​of these dynamic series:

The average level of consumption per capita, rubles: in the Republic of Buryatia -11848.66, in the Siberian Federal District - 13643.44, in Russia - 16992.89;

Average absolute increase in consumption per capita, rubles: in Buryatia - 3013.90, in the Siberian Federal District - 3526.15, in Russia - 4726.12;

The average growth rate of consumption per capita, in %: in the republic - 130.16, in the Siberian Federal District - 129.82, in Russia - 133.44.

Dynamics of per capita actual final consumption of households in the Republic of Buryatia, the Siberian Federal District and Russia

Based on the results of the calculations, we can conclude that the dynamics of per capita consumption slightly differs from the dynamics of per capita GRP production in a positive direction. Average indicators of time series confirm the noted tendencies.

To more accurately determine the position of the region among the regions of Russia in terms of average per capita consumption, we will consider a ranked series of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and compare it with the averages of the series - mode and median according to data for 2001.

Distribution of subjects of the Russian Federation by the level of actual final consumption of households per capita in 2001

Mode (Mo) is in the interval series from 21.3 to 23.35 thousand rubles with the largest value of the number of regions - 14. The median value (Me) is the -40th region of the ranked series (for 2001, this is the Belgorod region ).

Mo = 21755.6 rubles; Me = 23056 rubles.

In 2001, the average per capita consumption in the republic exceeded the modal value by 6.04%, the median value by 0.06%, while the average for Russia was 33.6% less, since the fashion and median indicators exclude the influence of the structure of regions in terms of volume consumption.

The position of the region among other subjects of the Russian Federation is also shown by the relative position indices (i) calculated for 1995–2001. according to the formulas below:

where X is the production of GRP per capita in the region;

Y is the actual household final consumption per capita in the region.

The calculation results showed:

The dynamics of and indicates a deterioration in the position of the republic in terms of the level of per capita GRP production among other regions and a deterioration in the situation in terms of the level of average per capita consumption of households.

To analyze the current trends, let us consider the dynamics of the share of actual final consumption of households in GRP as an indicator that characterizes the relationship between production and consumption of GRP per capita.

Share of actual household final consumption in GRP (GDP) for the Republic of Buryatia, the Siberian Federal District and Russia.

As you can see, the share of consumption in the region increased much more intensively than in the Siberian Federal District and Russia.

In general, despite the difference in trends in the dynamics of indicators, there is a dependence (correlation) between the levels of per capita GRP production and the final consumption of HH, for the study of which we use the traditional linear regression model:

where х is the average per capita production of GRP, rubles;

Theoretical (probable) value of the actual per capita final consumption of households for a given value of x, rubles;

The regression coefficient, which shows how many rubles the level of per capita consumption in the regions will change on average with a change in per capita production by 1 ruble;

Conditional level of per capita consumption at x = 0, rubles.

In 2001, the following parameters of the regression equation were obtained for the regions:

that is, the dependence of consumption on production by regions amounted to 34%, or per 1 ruble of growth in per capita GRP production, consumption growth averaged 34 kopecks.

For clarity, we show this dependence graphically:

The graph shows that the indicators of the bulk of the regions, as well as the Republic of Buryatia, are quite close to the theoretical regression line. Sharp deviations from it are observed only in two subjects (Moscow and Tyumen region).

For Buryatia in 2001, with the actual level of per capita GRP production of 29,978.5 rubles, the theoretical (probable) value of per capita consumption, according to the resulting equation, will be 21,602.4 rubles. The actual level of per capita consumption in the region in 2001 amounted to 23,069.8 rubles, which is 6.8% higher than the theoretical one. This indicates a lower than the average for Russia, the level of GRP in the republic.

Also for Buryatia we will separately calculate the dependence (correlation) of indicators in dynamics for 1995-2001. according to the linear model:

where x is the per capita production of GRP for 1995-2001, rubles;

Theoretical (probable) value of the actual per capita final consumption of households at a given value of x for 1995-2001, rubles;

The regression coefficient, which shows how many rubles the level of per capita consumption changed on average over the period with a change in per capita production by 1 ruble;

Conditional level of per capita consumption for the period at x = 0, rubles.

The following parameters of the regression equation are obtained:

that is, for the period under review, the dependence of the growth in consumption of households on the growth in the production of GRP was 79.5%, or for 1 ruble of growth in the average per capita production of GRP, consumption increased by an average of 80 kopecks.

For clarity, we will build a graphical model of dependence.

Based on the location of the points in the figure, we can say that in the last year (the highest point in the upper right corner of the graph), the growth in per capita consumption lagged behind the growth in production relative to the average level for the period. So, in 2001, with the actual level of per capita GRP production of 29,978.5 rubles, the theoretical (probable) value of per capita consumption, according to the equation obtained, will be 23,712.96 rubles. In fact, it amounted to 23,069.8 rubles, which is 2.7% lower than the theoretical value for this year.

Conclusion

In terms of economic development, Buryatia is between the "middle peasants" and the weakest regions. Analysis of the dynamics of the gross regional product of the Republic of Buryatia for 1995 - 2001. most characteristically reflects a gradual slowdown in the decline in production by 1998, and then the entry into a period of relative increase. The share of the GRP of Buryatia is insignificant in Russia's GDP, in 2001 it was 0.39%, and the average per capita gross regional product in the republic in 2001 was 48% of the Russian average, which is significantly lower than in 1995 (76.8%). By the size of this indicator, Buryatia closes the sixth ten in the list of regions. The basic growth rate of the republic is noticeably lower than the Russian one. Industry accounts for the largest share in the structure of GRP production, where some growth has been observed since 2000. In terms of the level of actual final consumption of households among the regions of the Siberian Federal District, the Republic of Buryatia occupies 6-8 places. In 2001, the per capita actual final consumption of the republic in relation to the figure for Russia amounted to 66.4% (in 1995 - 78.4%). The absolute growth and growth rate in Buryatia were negative in 1998. According to the results of calculations, the position of the republic both in terms of the level of per capita GRP production among other regions, and in terms of the level of per capita consumption of households worsened. As a result, the analysis of the production and consumption of the GRP of the Republic of Buryatia showed that the changes in the socio-economic development taking place on the territory of the republic are reflected in the dynamics and interconnection of the elements of the SNA.

The republic's economy combines various sectors of domestic demand (coal mining and electric power, engineering, food industry) and traditional forms of economy (extensive animal husbandry, fishing, fur trade). Non-ferrous metallurgy does not have an export potential, only the Ulan-Ude aircraft manufacturing enterprise (Mi helicopters and MiG fighters), created in the Soviet period near the border with China to provide for the Trans-Baikal Military District, works mainly for export. Also, excess electricity produced at the Gusinoozerskaya GRES is exported to Mongolia, and most of the timber harvested in Buryatia is supplied to China.

The economic crisis in Buryatia, which is deeper than in Russia as a whole, was exacerbated by such factors as the predominantly non-export specialization of the economy, the monoprofile nature of small towns and villages, remoteness from the economically developed regions of Russia, and the lack of internal unity of the territory between the BAM North and the agro-industrial South. It should be noted that the decline in industrial production in the republic (51% of the 1990 level) was less than in Russia as a whole (48%). However, this "softening" was achieved thanks to the growth in only three sectors: in non-ferrous metallurgy (due to low-profit gold mining in the northern regions), in the electric power industry and in the coal industry. Since their placement is highly localized, the total positive effect for the entire republic was small.

The rest of the industries experienced a severe recession, after which they still have not been able to recover. Even the post-default rise in import-substituting industries, which is typical for most regions, did not fully affect the development of the food and light industry in Buryatia due to the low solvency of the local population.

List of used literature

1. Course of socio-economic statistics, M, 2002 Nazarov

2. Macroeconomic statistics, I, 2000 Khamueva I.F.

3. Socio-economic statistics, M, 2002 Salin, Shpakovskaya

4. Statistics M, 2002 Eliseeva I.I.

5. The use of the GRP indicator in assessing the economic development of the region Miroedov A.A., Sharamygina O.A. Questions of statistics 9/2003

6. Interregional comparisons of GRP in the Russian Federation Granberg A.G., Zaitseva Yu.S. Questions of statistics 2/2003

7. Trial calculations of GRP in the Republic of Belarus Bokun N.I., Bondarenko N.N., Gnezdovsky Yu.Yu. Questions of statistics 1/2004

8. Stat. compilation GRP production for 1995 - 2002

9. Stat. collection Republic of Buryatia 80 years of U-U, 2003

10. Stat. collection Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators M, 2003

11.Stat. collection Regions of Russia volume 1.2 М, 2001

Indirectly measured financial intermediation services are the difference between interest received and paid by banks. These services are treated in the SNA as intermediate consumption. Since these services are difficult to attribute to the costs of any particular industry (sector), they are excluded from the GVA total for the economy as a whole.

Since obtaining accurate estimates of the consumption of fixed capital, consistent with the SNA concept, is associated with great difficulties, in practice indicators are more often used gross added value and gross domestic product, although from an analytical point of view, indicators are more important clean added value and pure internal product.

Purchase minus sales for each sector. At the level of the economy as a whole, the net consumption of newly produced or imported valuables.

The paper considers the relevance of the research topic. Bubble charts were used to study the dependence of the gross regional product of federal districts on fixed assets and employment in 2000 and 2012. Calculated, using production functions, the dependence of the gross regional product of the federal districts on fixed assets and employment, on investment and employment, on investment and costs for technological innovation. A grouping of subjects of the Russian Federation according to the elasticity of output by fixed assets has been constructed. The correlation coefficients between the per capita GRP and the share of a certain type of economic activity in the total GRP of the federal districts are calculated. A correlation analysis was carried out between the change in the number of employees in the federal districts and the change in real wages in them. Appropriate conclusions are made.

real wage

type of economic activity

per capita GRP

correlation coefficient

technological innovation costs

output elasticity

production functions

employment

investments

1. Abazova R.Kh., Shamilev S.R., Shamilev R.V. Some problems of urbanization of subjects of the North Caucasus Federal District // Modern problems of science and education. - 2012. - No. 4. - URL: www..10.2014).

2. Abusheva H.K., Shamilev S.R. Marriages and divorces in the Russian Federation and ways to reduce the latter // Modern problems of science and education. - 2013. - No. 4. - URL: www..10.2014).

3. Musaeva L.Z., Shamilev S.R. Migration in modern Russia: the need for control and optimization // Modern problems of science and education. - 2013. - No. 5. - URL: www..10.2014).

4. Musaeva L.Z., Shamilev S.R., Shamilev R.V. Features of the settlement of the rural population of the subjects of the North Caucasus Federal District // Modern problems of science and education. - 2012. - No. 5; URL: www..10.2014).

5. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2013: stat. Sat. / Rosstat. - M., 2013. - 990 p.

6. Suleimanova A.Yu., Shamilev S.R. Evaluation of the birth rate in the Russian Federation and measures to increase it // Modern problems of science and education. - 2013. - No. 4. - URL: www..10.2014).

7. Shamilev R.V., Shamilev S.R. Analytical and economic justification for increasing potato production in the Russian Federation and the Federal District // Modern problems of science and education. - 2013. - No. 4. - URL: www..10.2014).

8. Shamilev S.R. Dynamics of mortality and factors of its reduction in the Russian Federation // Modern problems of science and education. - 2013. - No. 5. - URL: www..10.2014).

9. Shamilev S.R., Shamilev R.V. Analysis of per capita GRP in the subjects of the North Caucasus Federal District // Modern problems of science and education. - 2011. - No. 6. - URL: www..10.2014).

10. Edisultanova L.A., Shamilev S.R., Shamilev R.V. Problems of optimization of municipalities in the ATD of subjects of the North Caucasus Federal District // Modern problems of science and education. - 2012. - No. 5. - URL: www..10.2014).

The current situation requires the use of various and modern tools for assessing economic development, financial balance, competitive conditions in the domestic and world markets.

From this point of view, individual scientists assume the use of production functions (which express the dependence of the result of production on resource costs) as the basis for a comprehensive analysis of such macroeconomic characteristics of a market economy as GRP. This explains the relevance of this topic.

Let us graphically reflect the dependence of the GRP of the FD on the fixed assets and employment in 2000 and 2012.

Rice. 1. Dependence of FD GRP on fixed assets and employment in 2000

Rice. 2. Dependence of FD GRP on fixed assets and employment in 2012

Figures 1 and 2 show that from 2000 to 2012, the gap in the GRP values ​​of the FD increased, there was a slight change in the number of people employed in the FD, and a significant uneven increase in both FC and GRP. Production functions of the type were built (where Y is the GRP of the regions; K is fixed assets; L is the average annual number of fixed assets; , α, β are coefficients), allowing us to consider the efficiency of using labor and fixed assets both at the level of the federal district and at the level of subjects of the Russian Federation. When constructing the production functions of the economy of the Russian regions, some difficulties arise: the time series are short; available data are not sufficiently accurate; inaccuracy of price measurement - price jumps in the Russian Federation are orders of magnitude greater than the slow changes taking place in the developed countries of the West; data on fixed assets do not correspond to their actually used part.

Except in some cases, the input data used to build the production function can be represented by indices, i.e. relative values, at least as follows: . The Cobb-Douglas function defines the output index Y as the weighted geometric mean of the capital K and labor L indices with weights α and β. The traditional PF is a function of averaging factors or can be reduced to such a function by a simple transformation of the original data. Since Y is an averaging function, it follows that on the chart, the time series of the output index Y must be located between the time series of capital K and labor L.

Rice. 3. Dependence of the GRP of the FD on fixed assets and employment in 2000-2012

It can be seen from the graph that the GRP cannot be an averaging function of the function that links Y to K and L, i.e. factors K and L do not fully describe the dynamics of output Y.

Table 1

Calculation of coefficients of elasticity of the production function for calculation

Calculations show that for all federal districts, a reduction in employment is necessary with the existing labor productivity, or the maximum possible increase in labor productivity is necessary (Table 1). It is clear that in Russia as a whole it is also not effective to increase the number of employees with the existing labor productivity.

Thus, we can state the inefficient use of labor resources not only in labour-surplus, but even in labour-deficient subjects.

table 2

Grouping of subjects of the Russian Federation according to the elasticity of output by OF

For the CR in 2012, the value of the coefficient of elasticity of the GRP of the regions in terms of CF is significantly less than 1, which in the long term, in order to increase production efficiency or increase labor productivity, means the need to increase the rate of accumulation and, accordingly, reduce the rate of consumption.

In total, in 9 constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the efficiency of output in terms of fixed assets is less than 1, which means a positive elasticity of GRP in terms of employment. Only in these 9 regions is it justified to increase employment to increase GRP (Table 2).

One option to address the lack or inadequacy of fixed asset data is to use fixed investment data instead of fixed asset data.

The advantages of this approach are explained by the high efficiency of investments directed both to attract idle funds into circulation and to acquire new funds, thereby increasing the share of effectively used capital.

Investment attractiveness is determined by many conditions.

Below we consider the following conditions: the impact of investment, as well as the combined impact of investment and labor on GRP.

Rice. 4. Dependence of the GRP of the FD on fixed assets and employment in 2000-2012

It can be seen from the graph that Y can be an averaging function of the function that relates K and L to Y, i.e. factors K and L fully describe the dynamics of output Y (Fig. 4.).

Table 3

Calculation of GRP elasticity for investments

Since the elasticity of GRP for investment is greater than the elasticity of GRP for employment (β=1-α), we can conclude that labor-saving (intensive) growth is observed in the period under review. It is most profitable to increase employment in the Far Eastern Federal District, the Siberian Federal District and the North Caucasus Federal District. Let us consider the dependence of GRP on investments and expenses for technological innovations.

Technological innovation costs (million rubles) Table 4

From the analysis of the econometric dependence of labor productivity for the economy of the regions of the Russian Federation, it can be seen that innovation factors practically do not predetermine changes in labor productivity (labor intensity). The main role in increasing labor productivity is still played by the investment factor, and the generation of innovations plays a supporting role. In the NWFD, Ural Federal District and Southern Federal District, the costs of technological innovation are unreasonably high and cannot be increased. The greatest efficiency is spent on technological innovations in the North Caucasus Federal District, Volga Federal District, Siberian Federal District, Central Federal District and Far Eastern Federal District (in descending order). The efficiency of production in the FD economy can be increased with the help of massive investments in fixed assets. The paper calculates the correlation coefficients between the per capita GRP and the share of a certain type of economic activity in the total GRP of the FD.

Table 5

Correlation coefficients between per capita GRP and the share of this type of economic activity in the total GRP of the FD in 2011

A high inverse relationship between per capita GRP and the share of agriculture in the total GRP is observed in almost all countries and regions. Another thing is that the high feedback between per capita GRP and healthcare and education only indicates their overestimated share in lagging regions (other types of economic activity are absent or underdeveloped), i.e. about the deformation of the regional structure of the market economy. Let's carry out a correlation analysis between the change in the number of people employed in the federal district and the change in real wages in them.

Table 6

Correlation analysis between changes in the number of people employed in federal districts and changes in real wages in them

From the data in the table it follows that in 2010-2012. wages did not act as a stimulator of employment growth, which is largely due to the low share of wages in production costs and the insufficiently high growth rates of real disposable money incomes of the population.

Based on the foregoing, we draw the following conclusions.

From 2000 to 2012, there was a slight change in the number of people employed in the federal district and a significant uneven increase in both fixed assets and GRP. Calculations demonstrate the inefficient use of labor resources, which requires a reduction in employment with the existing labor productivity in labor-deficient subjects and the maximum possible increase in labor productivity in labor-surplus subjects. From 2000 to 2012, labor-saving (intensive) growth is observed. It is most profitable to increase employment in the Far Eastern Federal District, the Siberian Federal District and the North Caucasus Federal District. Fixed assets and employment of the population do not fully describe the dynamics of GRP. It is more correct to use investments to describe the GRP dynamics. Investments give the greatest effect in the Central Federal District, then, as efficiency decreases, come the Ural Federal District, the Southern Federal District, the Northwestern Federal District, the Volga Federal District, the North Caucasus Federal District, the Siberian Federal District, and the Far Eastern Federal District. From the analysis of the econometric dependence of labor productivity for the economy of the regions of the Russian Federation, it can be seen that innovation factors practically do not predetermine changes in labor productivity (labor intensity). The main role in increasing labor productivity is still played by the investment factor, and the generation of innovations plays a supporting role. In the Northwestern Federal District, the Urals Federal District and the Southern Federal District, the costs of technological innovation are unreasonably high and cannot be increased. The most effective costs for technological innovations are in the North Caucasus Federal District, Volga Federal District, Siberian Federal District, Central Federal District and Far Eastern Federal District (in descending order). The efficiency of production in the FD economy can be increased with the help of massive investments in fixed assets. The high feedback between per capita GRP and healthcare and education only indicates their overestimated share in lagging regions (other types of economic activity are absent or underdeveloped), i.e. about the deformation of the regional structure of the market economy. In 2010-2012 wages did not fulfill the function of a stimulator of employment growth, which is associated with low growth rates of real monetary incomes of the population.

Reviewers:

Gezikhanov R.A., Doctor of Economics, Professor, Head of the Accounting and Auditing Department, Chechen State University, Grozny;

Yusupova S.Ya., Doctor of Economics, Professor, Head. Department of "Economics and Production Management" FGBOU VPO "Chechen State University", Grozny.

Bibliographic link

Vladimir Stepanovich Bochko

PhD in Economics, Professor, Honored Economist of the Russian Federation, Deputy Director of the Institute of Economics of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT:

ASSESSMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TERRITORY

In the context of the increasing role of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in the economic development of the country, it is necessary to more actively use modern indicators to assess the dynamics and socio-economic potential of the regions.

The logical continuation of the system of national accounts (SNA) used by Russia is the system of regional accounts (SRS). A.G. drew attention to this. Granberg, Yu.S. Zaitseva, N.N. Mikheeva, A.A. Miroedov, O.A. Sharamygina and other researchers.

The key indicator of the system of national accounts at the regional level is the gross regional product (GRP). The methodological principles of its construction were developed by the Nobel laureate R. Stone in the 1950s. Currently, regional accounts are used in many countries around the world. In Russia, the calculation of GRP has been carried out since 1994. At the same time, the first steps are being taken to create the CDS. At the same time, the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation follows the methodological provisions of the European Statistical Committee, which recommends starting work on the CDS with calculations by regions of gross value added and gross capital formation.

Of particular importance is the use of the GRP indicator in the context of the formation of a new scientific direction for the study of territories, which is called "spatial economy". A significant contribution to the development of its theoretical and methodological foundations was made by E.G. Animitsey,

N.M. Surnina and other Ural researchers.

This article attempts to analyze the gross regional product of the Sverdlovsk region in terms of assessing the economic development of the region.

The advantage of the GRP is that it can be used not only to assess the development of a particular subject of the Federation, but also to carry out

an objective comparison of the level of development of various subjects of the Russian Federation, as well as a comparison with data for Russia as a whole.

To characterize the results of economic activity on a national scale, the indicator of gross domestic product (GDP) is used.

Although the economic content of GRP and GDP are very close indicators, they do not coincide with each other either quantitatively or qualitatively.

First, the difference between GRP and GDP is the scale of performance coverage. GRP is limited to taking into account goods and services created in a certain territory of a country, called a region. Since a region, as a rule, is understood as a territory coinciding with the boundaries of a subject of the Federation, in statistical accounting GRP reflects the results of the activities of regions, republics and autonomous regions that are its subjects according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Secondly, GDP is greater than the sum of GRP for Russia, since in addition to it it includes value added related to the country as a whole and not distributed to individual regions. At the federal level, GDP includes the amount of value added of non-market collective services provided by state institutions to society as a whole (defense, public administration, etc.), value added created by financial and foreign trade intermediaries, as well as taxes on foreign economic activity.

The sectoral structure of GRP can be represented as a diagram (Fig. 1), which includes two large groups of industries and the value of net taxes on products.

Rice. 1. Structure of the gross regional product

The first group of industries that ensure the creation of the gross regional product includes industries that produce goods. The most important of these are industry, agriculture,

construction, as well as forestry and other activities for the production of goods.

The second group includes industries that produce services. These include transport, communications, trade and public catering, public utilities, information and computing services, science, healthcare, education, management, etc. All services, in turn, are divided into market and non-market services. At the same time, services in the field of healthcare, education, housing, culture and art, as well as geology and exploration of the subsoil can be both market and non-market in nature, and in trade, transport, communications and some other industries - only market.

Net taxes on products are taxes on products less subsidies on products. As you know, a subsidy is an allowance in cash or in kind, provided by the state at the expense of state or local budgets, as well as special funds to legal entities and individuals, local authorities. There are direct subsidies aimed at developing the necessary sectors of the economy, and indirect subsidies, which are a system of preferential tax rates, a policy of accelerated depreciation, etc.

Subsidies for products are a type of subsidies paid by the state to a producer for a unit of goods (services) produced. Most often, socially significant types of goods (services) are subsidized, the prices for which, in the absence of subsidies, would be too high for the mass consumer. With the help of subsidies, losses from the sale of products at prices that do not cover production costs and do not bring a certain amount of profit are compensated.

Since GRP is the newly created value of goods and services produced in the territory, it is calculated as the total value added of the sectors of the region's economy or, in other words, as gross value added. GRP is calculated at current market and basic prices (nominal GRP) and at comparable prices (real GRP)1.

Sectoral structure of the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region. The main volumetric characteristics of the structure of the gross regional product in the Sverdlovsk region are given in Table. one.

1 Market price - the price of the final buyer. It includes trade and transport margins, taxes on production and imports, and does not include subsidies on production and imports. In order to eliminate the impact of different rates of taxes and subsidies in different sectors of the economy on the structure of production and income generation, sectoral indicators are presented in the assessment at basic prices. Basic price - the price received by the producer for a unit of a good or service, excluding taxes on products, but including subsidies on products. Non-market goods and services are valued using the market price of similar goods and services sold on the market, if it can be established, or at production costs if there is no market price (in particular, the services of government agencies and non-profit organizations are valued this way).

Table 1

Sectoral structure of the gross regional product of the Sverdlovsk region, % of the gross regional product

Year Industries producing goods Of which Industries producing services Of which Net taxes on products

Industry Agriculture o t s l C o rt C Transport Communications Trade and public catering

1995 53,2 36,3 10,5

1996* 51,7 36,6 5,8 8,9 40,3 10,8 1,1 9,0 8,0

1997* 47,1 34,0 6,3 6,1 44,0 11,2 1,2 10,0 8,9

1998 51,6 39,2 5,6 6,0 41,8 10,3 1,2 10,8 6,6

1999 55,6 42,2 6,6 6,3 37,7 8,3 1,0 10,8 6,7

2000 55,9 43,5 5,5 6,2 38,1 9,5 1,2 10,7 6,0

2001* 54,7 42,2 5,9 5,9 39,9 9,4 1,3 11,7 5,4

Note. * Calculated on the basis of data from the Sverdlovsk Regional State Statistics Committee.

In the first place in terms of specific gravity, as can be seen from the table. 1, there are industries that produce goods. They account for more than half of the gross regional product. Moreover, their share is not only maintained, but is gradually increasing. Thus, in 1995 it was equal to 53.2%, then decreased somewhat, but in the late 1990s it began to increase again and reached 55.9% in 2000. In 2001, it dropped to 54.7%, but the total share of industries producing goods remains quite high and there are no signs that it will decrease.

If we compare similar processes in Russia as a whole and in highly developed industrial countries, we will have to note that, compared with the Sverdlovsk region, they go in the opposite direction: the share of industries producing services is growing in them, and not vice versa.

With the intensification of market reforms, the sectoral structure of Russia's GDP is gradually but steadily changing in favor of service-producing industries. Thus, in 1995, the share of industries producing goods in Russia was almost the same as in the Sverdlovsk region, i.e. was 53.3%, and

by 2000 it had dropped to 47.6%. At the same time, the share of industries producing services increased from 38.1% in 1995 to 45.0% in 2000. An increase in the share of trade and public catering in this area is observed (14.0% in 1998 and 19.3% in 2000), which naturally reflects the development of market relations and the focus of economic development on meeting the needs of people in accordance with the demand of the population.

So, with almost the same for the Sverdlovsk region and Russia, the initial values ​​for 1995 of the share of industries producing goods (53.2% - Sverdlovsk region; 53.3% - Russia), by 2000 the situation has changed

so much so that the Sverdlovsk region overtook Russia by more than 7 percentage points (55.9% - Sverdlovsk region; 47.6% - Russia). This negative economic process from the point of view of the development of market relations continues to be consolidated by the economic and investment policy pursued in the region.

The deterioration of the GRP structure in the Sverdlovsk region is caused by the growth of the share of industry among the sectors producing goods (from 36.6% in 1996 to 42.2% in 2001), including due to the metallurgical complex. In 1993, ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy together accounted for 45.9% of industrial output, and in 2000 it was already 50.2%. According to the Ministry of Economy and Labor of the Sverdlovsk Region, their share in 2003 was 52.5%. At the same time, the share of agriculture, transport, communications, trade and public catering changed insignificantly.

In itself, the fact of strengthening the industrial-production orientation of development does not bear anything negative. Each region should use its resources and opportunities. Focusing on them, the subjects of the Federation are looking for ways to raise the level of their economic development. Following this methodological approach, it is natural to believe that the Sverdlovsk region in modern conditions ensures its development precisely on the basis of the use of existing objective prerequisites and material conditions. In other words, being an industrial region, it continues to build up, above all, its industrial potential.

But such conclusions are correct only as long as we remain at the level of aggregated indicators. If, however, we pass from an analysis of industry as a whole to a consideration of its structure by branches and to elucidate the role and share of each branch in the development of the regional economy, then some generally correct provisions will have to be somewhat corrected and clarified. The most important among them will be the assertion that only such an industrial structure is optimal, in which manufacturing industries occupy a worthy place, and among them the main role belongs to science-intensive industries. Therefore, the raw orientation of the structure of industry cannot be recognized as its best option.

A positive process in changing the structure of GRP should be to increase the share of industries producing services. The need for such a direction of transformations in the structure of the gross regional product is associated, firstly, with the creation of a market infrastructure, especially with the development of banking, lending, insurance, real estate transactions, etc., and secondly, with the restructuring of production for the manufacture of those goods and services, which are increasingly focused on the diverse demand of the population, both in terms of price parameters and quality characteristics.

GRP per capita. In the analysis of GRP, an important place is occupied by the identification of trends in the value of the gross regional product per capita. This figure is perhaps the most

least reflects the dynamics of economic activity unfolding in the region.

In statistics, data on GRP per capita are given not in comparable, but in current prices. This makes it difficult to carry out some calculations, for example, comparisons of the GRP dynamics of the same region over a number of years, since the actual data include price increases due to inflation. Depending on how different were the inflation levels in the compared periods, the degree of errors in the calculations changes.

If comparisons are made for the same year between different regions, then the level of inflation does not matter, since both in the country as a whole and in individual regions, prices increased approximately in the same way in a given period of time. Therefore, the value of GRP per capita makes it possible to objectively compare the position of some regions with others for a certain year, since in this case inflationary processes practically do not affect the value of calculations. The existing slight differences in inflation rates for different regions are so small that they should be taken into account only when performing special calculations. For a general comparison of the activities of regions and the establishment of correlations in their development, differences in regional inflation are of no fundamental importance.

In the case when comparisons are made for different years, it is possible to compare data only “horizontally”, i.e. take different regions and compare their development for a certain year. The transition to a “vertical” comparison is possible only when the comparison over the years will act not as a ratio of the indicators of a given region to itself in time, but as a result of comparing different regions “horizontally” with each other.

Let us analyze the ratio of changes in the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region and the GDP of the Russian Federation. The data given in table. 2 allow us to detect two trends specific to the region. The first is that the value of GRP per capita in the region is constantly increasing. In nominal terms, it increased from 4,240.1 rubles. in 1994 to 47,028.0 rubles. in 2001, i.e. more than 11 times. Naturally, the main component of this growth was inflation. At the same time, a certain proportion is the actual increase in GRP due to the growth of production in the second half of the 90s of the 20th century. The second trend is less rosy and even worrisome. It consists in a relative decrease in the cost of the gross regional product per inhabitant of the region, compared with the figure for the Russian Federation as a whole.

table 2

The ratio of GRP per capita in the Sverdlovsk region and the Russian Federation,

r., until 1998 - thousand rubles.

Year Sverdlovsk region Russian Federation Sverdlovsk region in relation to the Russian Federation, %

1994 4 240,1 3 583,7 (+) 18,3

1995 12 376,0 9 566,3 (+) 29,4

1996 14 378,4 13 230,0 (+) 8,7

1997 15 902,2 15 212,3 (+) 4,5

1998 16 832,7 16 590,8 (+) 1,5

1999 26 044,6 28 492,1 (-) 8,6

2000 36 094,1 42 902,1 (-) 15,9

2001 47 028,0 54 325,8 (-) 13,4

From Table. Table 2 shows that from 1994 to 1998 inclusive, there was an excess of GRP per capita in the Sverdlovsk region compared to Russia. In 1994 it was 18.3%, in 1995 it increased to 29.4%. But starting from 1996, the excess value gradually decreased and in

1998 was only 1.5%.

Since 1999, the level of GRP per capita in the Sverdlovsk region has become lower than in Russia, and remained in this form in subsequent years. In 2001, it was 13.4% lower than the national average.

Such a steady downward process can only testify to the fact that the real development of the region's economy during the analyzed years is experiencing significant difficulties. One of the reasons for this situation is not just the preservation of a high proportion of industries producing goods in the region, but also the growth within them of the share of raw material-oriented industries, primarily ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy.

The ratio of the dynamics of the gross regional product per capita in the Sverdlovsk region and in the Russian Federation is clearly shown in fig. 2. Initially, the Sverdlovsk region steadily overtook the Russian Federation, and then just as steadily began to lag behind it.

Sverdlovsk region -■-Russian Federation

Rice. 2. The ratio of GRP per capita of the Sverdlovsk region and the Russian Federation

In order to test this alarming conclusion and establish its objectivity, we decided to carry out additional calculations by comparing the development of the Sverdlovsk region with neighboring regions that are located in approximately the same geographical areas.

climatic and economic and industrial conditions. Such regions, of course, are primarily the Chelyabinsk and Perm regions. They are so close in terms of general industrial potential and other indicators of development that in the scientific literature all three areas are often combined with the concept of "old industrial regions".

First look at Table. 3 shows that the Sverdlovsk region is developing better than the Chelyabinsk region, but inferior to the Perm region.

Table 3

The ratio of GRP per capita in the Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk and Perm regions, r., Until 1998 - thousand rubles.

Year Sverdlovsk Region Chelyabinsk Region Perm Region Ratio of the Sverdlovsk Region indicator, %

with the Chelyabinsk region with the Perm region

1994 4 240,1 3 844,5 4 436,5 (+) 10,3 (-) 4,4

1995 12 376,0 8 967,3 12 291,5 (+) 38,0 (+) 0,7

1996 14 378,4 13 193,2 14 481,8 (+) 9,0 (-) 0,7

1997 15 902,2 14 110,6 16 724,4 (+) 12,7 (-) 5,0

1998 16 832,7 12 700,5 18 615,5 (+) 32,5 (-) 9,6

1999 26 044,6 22 713,7 31 571,7 (+) 14,7 (-) 17,5

2000 36 094,1 36 908,7 43 869,7 (-) 2,2 (-) 17,7

2001 47 028,0 41 557,4 63 183,0 (+) 13,2 (-) 25,6

However, if the general assessment conclusion is correct, attention should be paid to the emerging trend of a gradual deterioration in the dynamics of the indicators of the Sverdlovsk region in relation to both the Chelyabinsk and Perm regions. So, in the mid-1990s, the Sverdlovsk region had a significant superiority over the Chelyabinsk region, reaching, for example, in 1998 up to 32.5%. But since the end of the 1990s, the gap began to decrease and in 2000 it had a negative value.

When comparing the indicators with the Perm region, the dynamics of development is also visible not in favor of the Sverdlovsk region. So, in the mid-1990s, the GRP per capita in both regions was almost the same: in 1995, the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region exceeded that of the Perm region by 0.7%, and in 1996 it was lower by the same amount. In other words, the development in neighboring regions proceeded “according to the same scenarios”. However, since 1997, the Perm region has been clearly separated, it is actively moving forward, increasing the distance every year. In 1997 the difference was 5.0%, in 1998 - 9.6%, in

1999 - 17.5, and in 2001 already 25.6%.

Why is the gap widening? Does the revitalization of economic activity in the Perm region play a role here, or is the situation in the Sverdlovsk region deteriorating? Most likely, there is both.

If the reason for the success of the Perm Region in comparison with the Sverdlovsk Region was only in the factors of the Perm Region itself, then in the competition of such regions with the same production and economic potential, the gap in indicators would be much smaller, as evidenced by the development data until 1996. Consequently, the lag is also associated with some negative processes taking place in the Sverdlovsk region itself. One of the reasons for this situation was the consolidation of its raw material orientation.

Growth dynamics of the physical volume of the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region. Since the cost indicators of changes in the gross regional product are largely burdened by the inflationary component, they cannot reflect the real changes that occur with GRP. The greatest difficulties arise with obtaining objective data, when it is necessary to compare the indicators of the same region over a number of years. Therefore, in order to obtain a real picture, which should reflect the actual processes in the GRP dynamics, the index of the GRP physical volume index is used. In this case, the gross regional product is calculated in comparable prices and reflects the real volume.

In connection with a certain faster development of Russia as a whole and its individual regions, the share of the Sverdlovsk region in the total volume of the country's gross regional product is gradually decreasing. If in 1995 the share of the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region in the total Russian volume was 4.1%, then in 2001 it was only 2.7%.

The index of the physical volume of the gross regional product of the Sverdlovsk region also varies unevenly (Table 4).

Table 4

GRP physical volume index of the Sverdlovsk region, % to the previous year

Year Sverdlovsk region For reference: change in the physical volume of the total GRP in the Russian Federation

1999 101,8 105,6

2000 112,2 110,7

2001 108,7 106,0

2002* 103,8 104,3

2003* 106,5 106,9

Note. * For the Sverdlovsk region - according to the data of the Sverdlovsk Regional State Statistics Committee, for the Russian Federation - the current data of the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation.

From Table. Figure 4 shows that the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region in its real terms began to grow since 1999. The most successful period was 2000, when the GRP increased by 12.2%. There were hopes that such high rates would be maintained in subsequent years. Although 2001 ended with a slowdown in growth rates, the latter were at such a high level that a new positive development of the economy could be expected. These two prosperous years were also significant for the fact that for the first time the Sverdlovsk Region overtook the Russian Federation in terms of GRP growth. If in 2000 in the Russian Federation the GRP growth rate was 110.7%, then in the Sverdlovsk region its growth was higher by 1.5 percentage points and amounted to 112.2%. In 2001, a favorable outcome was again on the side of our region. It seemed that the region's economy had entered the right direction and would continue its development in a given rhythm.

However, the next year undermined hopes for a sustainable outstripping development of the region, not only in relation to the Russian Federation. In 2002, the region's GRP grew by only 3.8%, which in itself was a low growth. In addition, this indicator again became less than the national one.

It was hoped that this was an accidental breakdown. But the data for 2003 again showed the result not in favor of the Sverdlovsk region. This leads to the idea that the region's lower GRP growth rates compared to Russia may become a recurring phenomenon.

The probability of such consequences is evidenced by the dynamics of the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region and the GRP in Russia as a whole over the past 7 years, shown in Fig. 3. Except 2000 and 2001 for the rest of the period, the growth rates of the physical volume of the region's GRP were lower than the growth rates of the total GRP of the Russian Federation.

/1Ї0 // 105U, h. ^ %h108.7 ChL0bh 106.9 104, ^106.5

Shch 101.2 G / / / > 101.8 / / "Chg 103.8

*ch9b \ h \ // // 93/b/

Sverdlovsk region -■---Russian Federation

Rice. 3. Comparative dynamics of the physical volume of the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region and the GRP of the Russian Federation as a whole

The problem of doubling the GRP of the Sverdlovsk region in relation to

2000 Since the gross regional product in a synthesized form reflects the results of the region's work, and the gross domestic product reflects the results of the country's economic activity, the leaders of the state and regions began to turn to these indicators. This made it possible to focus the attention of entrepreneurs and the entire population on solving such a problem, which, on the one hand, would be understandable to everyone, and on the other hand, would not simplify the essence of the proposed guidelines.

Both GRP and GDP characterize the final result of the production activity of economic units. These indicators reflect the value of the final goods and services produced by these units during the reporting period at the prices of the final consumer. Consequently, they orient the population and business entities to the production of not just finished products and services, but only those that are in solvent demand.

In economic terms, GRP, like GDP, when calculated by the production method, is the sum of the gross value added of all industries. This means that society must organize the activities of enterprises, organizations and spheres of social production in such a way that the share of value added in the product (service) tends to increase. This will reflect the growth of efficiency and productivity. But not only that. What is important is that part of the value added is presented to workers in the form of their wages and, ultimately, their income. Therefore, it becomes clear that an increase in GRP (or GDP) is tantamount to an increase in the welfare of the population of a region, a country.

Based on this economic understanding of GRP (GDP), the problem of its growth is indeed the most important for both the leaders of the regions and the country, and for performers of any level, rank, position and qualification. The increase in GRP (GDP) is based on the success of the development of society, the individual, his material wealth and conditions for the multiplication of spiritual culture. Therefore, the task (and problem) of actively increasing GRP and GDP may become the main mobilizing economic slogan for the next 20-25 years both for individual regions and for Russia as a whole.

At present, the leadership of the Sverdlovsk region has set the task of doubling the GRP by 2010. It followed the call of the President of the country to double Russia's GDP by the same date.

To what extent is it possible to solve the named problem in the specified period of time? To answer this question, it is necessary to find out, firstly, how the region “walks” in terms of GRP increment, and secondly, how it should “walk” in order to reach the specified finish line on time.

The movement of the Sverdlovsk region to increase the GRP was mentioned above. If the year 2000 is taken as the base for doubling GRP, then the “step” of the region was slowing down: in 2001, the growth of GRP amounted to 8.7%, in 2002 - 3.8%. The situation slightly improved in 2003: the GRP growth rate was 6.5%. The average annual growth for this period was 6.3%.

Our calculations show that if we take the GRP level of the Sverdlovsk region in 2000 as a unit, then to double it in 10 years, i.e. by 2010, it is necessary to ensure an average annual increase in GRP of at least 7.5%\

If in any year the growth rate is below this indicator, then in subsequent years it will be necessary to exceed the 7.5% increase.

The regional government has an intention to end 2004 with a GRP growth of 7.5%. If this happens, then the Sverdlovsk region may enter into a rhythm of movement that will enable it to actually achieve its stated goal by 2010.

1 Calculations for the Sverdlovsk region correspond to the dynamics of gross domestic product indices for Russia as a whole. In 2000, its GDP was 66% of the 1990 level. To double this value by 2010, it is necessary to have GDP growth rates of at least 7.5-7.7% per year. However, practice shows that Russia has not yet reached the level of 7.5% GDP growth per year. In any case, in 2001, GDP growth was 5.0%, in 2002 -4.3%, and in 2003 - 6.9%.

At the same time, from the point of view of improving the well-being of the entire population, one should not overestimate the importance of the growth of the gross regional product of the Sverdlovsk region by 2010 by 2 times, since even a doubled GRP in its physical volume will only approach the level of 1990 or slightly will exceed

A fundamentally important point is the identification and activation of the GRP base that will provide the desired level of growth in the gross regional product. It is necessary to proceed, firstly, from an analysis of the share of industries in the GRP structure and their growth rates, and secondly, from the direction of the economic development of the region as a whole.

Table data. 5 show that over the six analyzed years, serious changes, both positive and negative, have occurred in the structure and share of individual industries.

Table 5

Dynamics of the GRP structure of the Sverdlovsk region by industry (calculated on the basis of )

Share of gross added

Sectors of industry value, %

1996 2001

Production of goods 51.75 54.73

Including by industry:

industry 36.61 42.18

agriculture 5.76 5.93

forestry 0.13 0.11

construction 8.90 5.87

other activities for the production of goods 0.34 0.63

Production of services 40.29 39.86

Market services 31.34 33.33

Including by industry:

transport 10.75 9.44

communication 1.14 1.27

trade and catering 8.97 11.69

information and computing services 0.04 0.30

real estate transactions 1.49 3.58

utilities 2.61 1.24

insurance 0.18 0.43

housing 1.39 0.87

provision 0.59 1.48

public education 0.27 0.57

culture and art 0.08 0.11

management 1.06 0.58

other market services 2.77 1.77

Non-market services 8.95 6.53

Including by industry:

housing 0.95 0.37

health care, physical culture and social

provision 3.06 1.85

public education 3.20 2.27

culture and art 0.29 0.22

management 1.01 1.77

other non-market services 0.44 0.05

Net taxes on products 7.96 5.41

Among the positive aspects, one should mention the preservation of the share of services in the total volume of GRP. In 1996, they amounted to 40.29%, and by 2001 they had only slightly decreased and amounted to 39.86%. But this is relative well-being, since the share of services should still grow, not decline. In addition, it is important to note such a phenomenon as an increase in the share of market services and, accordingly, a decrease in the share of non-market services.

A more important positive shift is a significant increase in the share of trade and public catering, information and computing services, real estate transactions among market services. The aforementioned series of positive changes testifies to the gradual consolidation of market relations in the region's economy and the creation of the necessary infrastructure for them.

There is also a significant amount of negative progress. First, there was an increase in the share of industries producing goods, which does not correspond to Russian and world trends in the transformation of the GRP structure. Secondly, the share of industry continues to grow. On the whole, this is not a negative characteristic, but on the condition that manufacturing, rather than raw materials, will prevail among industrial sectors. Thirdly, the share of construction has decreased, which may lead to a decrease in GRP growth, since construction usually acts as one of the locomotives of the overall increase in growth rates. Fourth, among the market services, the share of transport and housing is declining, although usually these sectors, along with communications, rush forward with the development of market relations. Fifth, an increase in the share of management in the system of non-market services can become a limiting factor in increasing the growth rate of GRP: from 1996 to 2001, it increased from 1.01 to 1.77%. The multiplying expenditures on management from budgetary funds testify not only to an increase in the wages and incomes of officials, but also to an increase in their very number, which leads to the bureaucratization of the system of management of the economy and society.

These positive and negative trends in the change in the structure of GRP do not exhaust the entire depth of the changes that took place during the period from 1996 to 2001 inclusive. But they suggest ways to choose directions for improving the structure of the region's economy in order to increase the growth rate of GRP and the economic well-being of the population.

It should be understood that the focus on raw materials will not save the region. Its wealth is not in natural resources, but in the ability to use them. Therefore, it is necessary to develop intellectual industries, primarily manufacturing, and rely on knowledge-intensive industries.

Literature

1. Granberg A., Zaitseva Yu. Production and use of the gross regional product: inter-regional comparisons // Russian Economic Journal. 2002. No. 10.

2. Miroedov A.A., Sharamygina O.A. Using the indicator of gross regional product in assessing the economic development of the region // Questions of statistics. 2003. No. 9.

3. Mikheeva N.N. Macroeconomic analysis based on regional accounts. Khabarovsk-Vladivostok: Dalnauka, 1998.

4. Surnina N.M. Spatial Economics: Problems of Theory, Methodology and Practice / Nauch. ed. E.G. Animitsa. Yekaterinburg: Publishing House Ural. state economy un-ta, 2003.

5. Regions of Russia: Stat. Sat: In 2 volumes / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 1998. T. 2.

6. Regions of Russia: Stat. Sat: In 2 volumes / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2001. T. 2.

7. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2002: Stat. Sat. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2002.

8. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2003: Stat. Sat. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2003.

9. Russian statistical yearbook. 2002: Stat. Sat. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2002.

10. Russian statistical yearbook. 2003: Stat. Sat. / Goskomstat of Russia. M., 2003.

11. "Express information" of the Sverdlovsk Regional Committee of State Statistics for 1996 and 2001.

Work description

The purpose of this course work is to conduct a statistical analysis of the produced GRP on the example of the Vologda Oblast.
The tasks of the work are:
study of the GRP indicator and its place in the national accounting system;

analysis of GRP dynamics for the period from 2000 to 2010

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...…3

2. Analysis of the structure and dynamics of the produced GRP………………..……..10

2.3 Determination of the main trend of GRP by various methods……….13
3. Studying the relationship between the produced GRP and the factors affecting it…………………………………………………………………..….17
3.1 Paired correlation-regression analysis………………………...17
3.2 Multiple correlation and regression analysis………………23
3.3 Forecasting produced GRP based on the trend equation and based on the regression equation…………………………………………..…23
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….…30
List of used literature……………………………………………...34
Applications………………………………………………………………...……35

Files: 1 file

<<Вологодская государственная молочнохозяйственная

Academy named after N.V. Vereshchagin>>

Faculty of Economics

Specialty: Finance and credit

distance learning

Statistics and Information Technology

COURSE WORK

in financial statistics

"Statistical analysis of the produced GRP"

Executed by Yu.A. Kotova

student, code 1040041

Checked by N.B. Vershinin

Art. teacher

Vologda - Dairy

Introduction………………………………………………………………………...…3

1. The place of GRP in the national accounting system………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Analysis of the structure and dynamics of the produced GRP………………..…….. 10

2.1 Analysis of the GRP structure……………………………………………………...10

2.2 Analysis of GRP dynamics……………………………………………………....12

2.3 Determination of the main trend of GRP by various methods……….13

3. Studying the relationship between the produced GRP and the factors affecting it…………………………………………………………………..….17

3.1 Paired correlation-regression analysis………………………...17

3.2 Multiple correlation-regression analysis………………23

3.3 Forecasting produced GRP based on the trend equation and based on the regression equation…………………………………………..…23

3.4 Factor analysis by index method………………………………...26

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….…30

List of used literature…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Applications…………………………………………………………………………35

Introduction

The current economic status of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation requires the use of various tools for assessing economic development, financial balance, and competitive conditions in the domestic and world markets. On the other hand, such instruments are necessary for conducting an active federal policy aimed at eliminating interregional disparities and strengthening the economic and political integrity of the country.

Strengthening the independence of the regions, the development of budgetary federalism increase the importance of regional policy. Under these conditions, the development of regional management decisions requires modern approaches to their information support and economic justification. From this point of view, the system of national accounts (SNA) is a universal basis for a comprehensive analysis of the generalizing characteristics of a market economy. The logical continuation of the SNA for the regional level is the system of regional accounts (SRS). The central position in the SNA is occupied by the gross domestic product (GDP), and in the CDS - its regional counterpart - the gross regional product (GRP). It characterizes the level of economic development and the results of economic activity of all economic entities in the region.

Without GDP (GRP), it is impossible to build the most important national (regional) accounts.

In Russia, the SNA began to be implemented from the federal level. However, the regions also feel the need for a modern statistical generalizing model. In our country, which unites 89 territorial-administrative formations with different time zones and geographical locations, there are significant differences in the levels of economic and social development of the regions. Therefore, the problem of calculating the gross product for each region is particularly acute.

Not only territorial authorities, but also the state as a whole are interested in information that comprehensively characterizes the economy of all regions, which allows the development of economic policy and the evaluation of the effectiveness of decisions made at the regional level.

The most common quantitative indicator of the economic development of regions is the dynamics of the gross product of the territory. Interregional comparisons on its basis, using, if necessary, additional cost and natural indicators, make it possible to determine the direction and intensity of economic processes leading to serious shifts in the interregional balance of power.

The task of calculating regional macroeconomic indicators is of particular importance in connection with the increasing role of GRP in reforming interbudgetary relations and the use of this indicator in the distribution of funds from the Fund for Financial Support of the Subjects of the Russian Federation.

The purpose of this course work is to conduct a statistical analysis of the produced GRP on the example of the Vologda Oblast.

The tasks of the work are:

1. study of the GRP indicator and its place in the national accounting system;
2. comparative analysis of the structure
3. analysis of GRP dynamics for the period from 2000 to 2010;
4. determination of the main GRP trend using the methods of enlarged intervals, moving average and analytical alignment;
5. conducting pair and multiple correlation-regression analysis;
6. forecasting the produced GRP based on the trend equation and based on the regression equation.
7. conducting a factor analysis of the gross regional product using the index method for 2009 and 2010.

The subject of the course work is the GRP, and the object is the Vologda Oblast.

The course work used Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, StatWork, as well as methods - tabular, graphical, comparisons, calculation of dynamics indicators, the method of averages, aggregated intervals, moving average, analytical alignment and the correlation-regression method.

Statistical data for the analyzed period - from 2000 to 2010 - are taken from the "Statistical Yearbook of the Vologda Oblast".

1. Place of GRP in the national accounting system

Gross regional product (GRP) is a general indicator of the economic activity of the region, characterizing the process of production of goods and services. Gross regional product (GRP) - an indicator that measures gross value added, calculated by excluding the volume of its intermediate consumption from the total gross output, is defined as the sum of newly created values ​​of the region's economic sectors.

At the national level, the gross regional product (GRP) corresponds to the gross national product, which is one of the basic indicators of the system of national accounts.

GRP is calculated in current basic and market prices (nominal GRP), as well as in comparable prices (real GRP). The valuation of GRP at basic prices differs from the valuation at market prices by the amount of net (minus subsidies on products) taxes on products. GRP in basic prices is the sum of value added in basic prices by type of economic activity. The transition to the assessment of GRP in basic prices is due to information problems in determining the amount of taxes on products. GRP at market prices assumes the inclusion of net taxes on products. The procedure for collecting and processing information on taxes on products established by the Federal Tax Service does not allow obtaining information on taxes accrued and payable to the budget for the reporting period, as required by the SNA concept. In order to ensure a methodologically consistent time series, GRP indicators, starting from the results of 2004, are published in basic prices.

The indicator of gross regional product is very close in content to the indicator of gross domestic product (GDP). However, there is a significant difference between GDP (at the federal level) and GRP (at the regional level) indicators. The sum of gross regional products for Russia does not coincide with GDP, since it does not include value added from non-market collective services provided by state institutions to society as a whole.

Just like GDP at the federal level, the gross regional product at the regional level is obtained as the difference between output and intermediate consumption. [#7]

Calculations are currently being made at the regional level:

1. produced GRP;

2. income generation accounts:

3. individual elements: accounts for the use of disposable income, capital accounts.

GRP at the production stage is defined as the sum of newly created values ​​produced in a particular region. In market prices, it is equal to the sum of the value added of the sectors of the economy created during the reporting period by resident economic units, and calculated as the difference between output and intermediate consumption, plus net taxes on products.

The formation of GRP by source of income reflects the primary income received by units directly involved in production, as well as government bodies (public sector organizations) and non-profit organizations serving households. In this method, gross profit/gross mixed income is the balancing item and is defined as the difference between GRP calculated by the production method, at market prices and wages of employees and net taxes on production and imports.

GRP, calculated using the use method, is the sum of the expenditures of all economic sectors on final consumption, gross capital formation and net exports.

To characterize the change in GRP compared to the previous period, the indicators of GRP production are recalculated into comparable prices. In this case, the method of direct deflation is used (revaluation of the gross value added of industries using the output price index of each industry) or the method of extrapolation of the basic level of the industry's value added by quantitative indices of indicators that adequately reflect the dynamics of production development in this industry. [Number 3]

The GRP deflator index is the ratio of the volume of GRP calculated in actual prices to the volume of GRP calculated in comparable prices of the base period. Unlike the price index for goods and services, the GRP deflator characterizes the change in wages, profits and consumption of fixed assets as a result of price changes, as well as the nominal amount of net taxes.

When calculating the gross regional product (GRP), the following elements are not taken into account:

Value added of industries that provide collective non-market services to society as a whole (public administration, defense, international activities, etc.);

The added value of financial intermediary services (primarily banks), whose activities are rarely limited to strictly individual regions;

Value added of foreign trade services, which in many cases can only be obtained at the federal level;

Part of the taxes (taxes on imports and exports) that cannot be taken into account at the regional level.

As for the first point of the considered elements, these services should be accounted for at the place of their production (provision), and their value should be included in the volume of the GRP of the corresponding region.

The volume of these collective services is determined in the amount of the relevant state budget expenditures reflected in the report on the execution of the federal budget. All federal budget expenditures in the regional context should be taken into account and reflected by the system of regional treasuries in accordance with the current unified budget classification. But the practice of accounting for some federal budget expenditures for the country as a whole, without breaking down into individual regions, continues to this day.

This is mainly due to the inability to determine to which specific region the expenditures made can be attributed (for example, budget expenditures on international cooperation, public debt servicing, etc.), as well as to persistent financial accounting shortcomings or some political considerations (defense spending , internal affairs bodies, etc.).

Thus, the presence of problems associated with the distribution of part of public spending among the regions of the country, as well as with overcoming the shortcomings of regional accounting (incomplete reflection of data in treasury reports) currently force them to abandon their accounting at the regional level.

In addition, among the positions that determine the discrepancy between the gross domestic product as a whole and the sum of gross regional products for all territories, include indicators that reflect financial and foreign trade intermediation.

The production of financial intermediary services in modern conditions is very difficult to correctly account for the regions. Due to the specifics of banking activity, it is problematic to tie its volume to one region where the bank is registered. A bank may be registered, for example, in Moscow or have only a branch here, which, as a rule, conducts a large volume of operations, but at the same time, a Moscow bank or a Moscow branch of a provincial bank today can actually provide financial intermediation practically throughout Russia. As a result, territorial statistical bodies have practically no data in order to accurately assess the production of financial services in the region.

2. Methodology for the study of socio-economic processes and phenomena in the regions

2. Methodology for the analysis of the gross regional product

2.4. Analysis of economic and structural proportions of the gross regional product of the Rostov region

We will conduct a study of the economic and structural proportions of the gross regional product that have developed in the Rostov region.

Calculation of GRP by the above method allows:

Analyze the dynamics of productivity (relative and absolute) of the region's economy in order to identify the structural transformation of the region's economy;

Consider the dynamics of sectoral shares of gross output and gross value added, characterizing the direction of ongoing structural and institutional shifts in the regional economy;

Express the growth trend in the sphere of production or services;

Identify the leading industries (points of economic growth) by the industry's share in the total gross value added;

Determine the ratio of the share of market and non-market services in the total volume of gross value added of services produced;

Consider the dynamics of cost GRP under the influence of its constituent elements: gross output, intermediate consumption, net taxes on production.

The analysis of the dynamics of the productivity of the regional economy, the structural sectoral patterns of the economy of the Rostov region and the structural and economic proportions of the GRP production was carried out on the basis of information provided by the Rostov Regional Committee of State Statistics.

In general terms, the productivity of an economic system is understood as its ability to produce a surplus of goods and services in excess of the technologically necessary volume of consumption of these goods and services in the production process. The totality of goods and services in the amount of such a surplus is called economic surplus. In value form at the macro level, it is characterized by the indicator of produced GDP, at the meso level - by produced GRP. The degree of productivity of the regional economy (relative productivity) can be estimated by the share of GRP in its gross output and is calculated by the formula

where GVA p and GVA at- gross value added, respectively, of the industries of the manufacturing sector and the service sector.

Let us analyze the dynamics of the gross output of the economy of the Rostov region in market prices in the context of its components: intermediate consumption (IC) and GRP (Fig. 2.10).

Rice. 2.10. The structure of the gross output of the Rostov region,

in % of the total

The analysis shows that the relative productivity of the region's economy as a whole decreased and by 2001 was 50.7% against 51.0% in 1997. This is less than the degree of productivity of the Russian economy (in 1997 this figure was 53.3%, and in 2001 - 55.1%). There is a relationship between absolute productivity, measured by the value of real GRP, and its relative productivity (Fig. 2.11).

In 1998, absolute productivity reaches its lowest level of decline - 96.7% compared to the level of 1997 (100%) (the period of the financial crisis in Russia), and the share of GRP in GR increases to a maximum value of 54.7%. Then the economy enters a phase of economic recovery: its absolute productivity begins to grow, and its relative productivity decreases to 50.7% in 2001. This relationship indicates, firstly, that the market structural transformation of the economy of the Rostov region, aimed at , under the influence of the institutional changes made, continues. Secondly, institutional market reforms have contributed to the development in the region of a complex of industries that produce products with a high share of value added in gross output.

Rice. 2.11. Dynamics of real GRP production and its share in GDP, in %

Let us analyze the structural shifts in more detail in the context of all sectors covered by the SNA, grouping them into two sectors - production and services. To do this, first consider the structure of the produced GRP of the Rostov region (Fig. 2.12).

In the structure of the produced GRP, there is an increase in the share of the sphere of production of goods from 44.1% in 1997 to 50.8% in 2001, while the share of the service sector decreases from 50.5% to 43.4, respectively. It should be noted that significant changes occurred in the GRP structure during the period under review, which can be divided into two time periods:

From 1997 to 1998 the prevailing tendency is for the share of production of services to exceed the share of production of goods (in 1997 - by 6.4%, in 1998 - by 8.3%);

From 1999 to 2001 there is a noticeable tendency for the share of production of goods to exceed (mainly due to the “industry” sector) over the share of production of services (in 1999 - by 2.4%, in 2000 - by 7.5%, in 2001 - by 7.4%).

Rice. 2.12. Structure of produced GRP in 1997–2001, in %

The change in the structure of GRP can be traced according to Table. 2.9.

Table 2.9

Dynamics of the structure of produced GRP by sectors of the economy

So, despite the ongoing fluctuations in the material structure of the GRP, the Rostov region remains more of a “commodity” region with potential reserves for the development of both the sphere of production of goods and the sphere of production of services.

Specific gravity industries that produce goods, in GRP for the period under review (1997–2001) were constantly changing. Industry occupies the largest share in the total GVA of industries, the share of which decreased by 1.4% in 1999 compared to 1997, and in 2001 it increased by 3.1%. Such growth is explained by higher price growth for products, mainly, fuel, timber, woodworking industries. Nevertheless, the following industries show a steady positive trend over the past two years: electric power industry (228% in 2001), woodworking and pulp and paper (112.6%), light industry (115.4%), building materials (104, 8%) and food (104.9%). The share of agriculture increased by 8.1% in 1999 compared to 1997, and in 2001 it decreased by 4.1%; the share of construction decreased by 2.6% in 1999 and increased by 3.5% in 2001.

In the service sector, the largest share in the volume of GRP is occupied by market services, the share of which decreased by 3.7% in 2001 compared to 1997. The preponderance of the provision of market services (35.6%) over non-market (7.8%) occurred in the following sectors of the economy: transport, communications, trade and public catering, housing and communal services. Specific gravity non-market services decreased by 3.4% in 2001 compared to 1997 due to a sharp decrease in funding from the state, regional budgets and state off-budget funds for such sectors as: health care, physical education and social security, culture and art, education, management.

Consideration of the dynamics of the sectoral structure of GRP production in the Rostov region in an expanded form allows us to identify the main structural shifts (Table 2.10).

Table 2.10

Shifts in the sectoral structure of the economy of the Rostov region for 1997–2001, in %