<<
>>

1.1. Market specificity of management in the conditions of system transformation of territorial economic systems

Dynamics of transformation of the Russian economy is connected by property complexes of a state ownership with sequence, depth and its irreversibility institutsionalnyh the transformations setting system frameworks of formation of base principles of construction of uniform economic space.
It is important to consider also, that demokraticheski the organised economy structurally develops of various regional economic systems. And sistemoobrazujushchim as an element of the given process the regional institute of the property acts.
The basic specificity institutsionalnogo buildings of market institutes in the Russian economy consists that they not samoformirujutsja, and "crystallise" from an environment of command-administrative economy. National scales of nationalisation of economic system, displacement of the centre of gravity of economy towards material sphere, a disproportion between its branches, all it has predetermined long character of its market transformation.
Saved scale of objects of a state ownership stipulates macroeconomic consequences of the prepotent mechanism of its realisation. Therefore in the conditions of formation of the Russian market economy in it is necessary to use as much as possible not only market mechanisms a trance -
Formations, but also the state pattern of ownership representing rather significant industrial potential of the country.
The Russian practice of market reforms has confirmed their universal law. Private property institution creation at the privatised enterprises always is hindered by action of certain restrictions. So, for the state enterprises (up to the beginning of 1999) there was a restriction on goods sale under the price, below cost. Such restriction, moreover in a combination to the superwasteful mechanism of formation of the cost price, has led to that many Russian enterprises, and not having had time to become full subjects of a market private property institution, have turned to bankrupts because on the majority of the privatised enterprises the special type of constant expenses - costs of not market economic policy was formed.
It speaks features of industrial potential, on - factorial structure and territorial placing (at least, at the moment of the beginning of privatisation changes) which were set by former economic system. Till now dynamics proizvodst-vennogo potential of the Russian enterprises saves such ekzogennuju an orientation as they for the present are not reoriented on rynoch th purposes of maximisation of profit.
This fact in certain degree speaks "inheritance", from the "socialised" property, namely, significant charges the enterprises of a social infrastructure. To refuse the similar mechanism of financing of a social infrastructure the Russian economy objectively it was not ready.
Unfortunately, any of the privatisation schemes used in a course both initial, and the subsequent stages of reform, did not consider this specific type of constant expenses of the Russian enterprises, koto -
ryj, naturally, has affected a management efficiency both state, and private enterprises.
The problem is generated not so much themes, that privatisation in Russia was carried out by the accelerated rates, or that the domestic economy has followed this way much after other countries, - a problem as it is represented, has been to a certain extent programmed by certain rupture between ideal model of the property in an economic theory and the developed practical mechanism of its functioning.
As principal cause of such backlog of the theory of the property from requirements of practice rynochno-transformatsionnogo the period absence of uniform conceptual approaches in research as property, and in working out of its administrative toolkit acts.
Therefore ordering of a methodological problematics of the modern theory of the property and the management theory the state enterprise has important significance for overcoming of noted backlog.
According to an economic theory the property system represents raznourovnevyj, multisubject and slozhnostrukturirovannyj eko-nomichesky a phenomenon. Kategorialnye property characteristics form a base layer of the most important economic concepts through which all other elements of economic system "are appeared through".
It is possible to consider as feature of a domestic economic science that quite often theoretical searches of uniform treatment of the property are accompanied by numerous reproaches from the experts accusing theorists in «theological love to definitions», and those, in turn, condemn experts for enthusiasm for unidirectional submission about the property and for their unwillingness to understand, that "unsoluble" contradictions in a reality should be allowed at least in the theoretical plan.
To distinctions in kategorialnoj property characteristics in theory and practice are added the distinctions caused by different conceptual approaches, the developed in domestic and foreign economic thought.
The domestic economic theory of previous decades historically and logically leant against K.Marx's approach. Therefore for it property consideration as the basic relation characterising an accessory of conditions and results of production to economically isolated economic subject was more traditional. Within the limits of such approach the property appeared, as a rule, as economically not structured formation, in limits and by means of which the given object of the property exclusively belonged only to the concrete participant of a social production. As a result, accepting visibility of the relation of the person to a thing, sob-stvennost always there is a relation of "proprietor" to "nesobstvenniku". The property sociality consists that the pirated object has not only the visible proprietor, but also invisible nesobstvennika.
The world economic theory has defined the general signs inherent in the property in any company.
The property is obshcheekonomicheskoe the phenomenon as is present at all historical steps of social development.
The property - the social relation for is purely public phenomenon, and it not only is generated by company, but also can is real exist only in it.
The property - not simply public, and socially - relations of production as develops on assignment of conditions and results of a social production.
4. The property - not simply social, not simply industrial, is the basic (sistemoobrazujushchee) the relation.
As indisputable achievement of the considered approach application of dialectic methods as the most adequate acts at izuche-nii the difficult structured objects of knowledge. However it preimu-shchestvo property considerations at macrolevel turned around nedos-tatkami its considerations at microlevel.
The western economic theory in treatment of the property was developed within the limits of various approaches - institutsionalnoj economy, economy of the right, the theory of the organised industry which, in turn, represented set raznonapravlennyh theoretical designs.
Classification of the basic conceptual approaches in property research carried out by the author of dissertation is resulted on fig. 1.1.
Possibility of the account of the accumulated experience of the conceptual building which is carried out in each of "compartments" institutsionalnoj of the theory for the purpose of a finding of unity of methodological bases and formation of own theoretical base of base is thus essentially important.
The problem of search of methodological bases for the property analysis could be decided completely only for the account institutsionalnogo the approach if it was monostrukturen. However in it the dualism "old" institutsionalizma and novelty neoinstitutsionalnoj economy till now is saved. Has put, of course, not only in the name, and in basic distinction of these two conceptual approaches. Within the limits of the first adhere so-called «makroinstitu - tsionalnoj» treatment in the property analysis, including it first of all the economic institute setting "game rules" for all economic subjects, i.e. sistemoobrazujushchim an element external institutsionalnoj environment. And "neoinsttputsionalisty" consider the property and at microlevel - within the limits of the organisation ("firm"), i.e. as internal institutsionalnoj
Environments, as «a bunch of the rights» which can be distributed between various subjects.


Fig. 1.1. The basic approaches institutsionalnogo the analysis
Properties

Sources modern western institutsionalizma can be found in K.Marx's "Capital", but the conventional ancestors institu-tsionalnoj theories are T.Veblen and J. Kommons.
Though property relations directly were not the focus of attention concepts veblena, however, considering behavioural habits of individuals, he noticed, that at the heart of the property and
Competitiveness in the market the instinct of rivalry leading to "demonstrative consumption» when the individual aspires to consume and accumulate more blessings not from the point of view of own necessity, and orentirujas on consumption of other members of company lays.
Sights veblena and Kommonsa coincided not always. For our research it is important to consider, that Web flax considered public institutes as a barrier on a progress way, and Kommons in bolshej degrees neutral.
Other representative of school old institutsionalizma K.Polani analyzes the property within the limits of various institutsionalnyh systems: West European and East Europe. In its opinion the private property institution inherent in the western civilisation, is the basic institute setting changes of all social system of company, and the property institute in east civilisations gravitates to the communal organisation, that vlijaeet on structure of company and behaviour индивидов2.
Modern institutsionalnaja the economy which has grown from traditional institutsionalnogo of the approach though has expanded (enough to tell about the theory of postindustrial (posteconomic) company (D.Bell, G.Kann), concepts of a postmodernism (Z.Bodrijard), the theory of information company (J.Masuda1), however has saved "root" inslitutsionalnye bases.
In focus of attention new institutsionalnoj economy appeared those spheres of researches which far fell outside the limits purely a market economy, i.e. postmarket processes. Thereof within the limits of the named theoretical designs methods are rejected neoklassi -
cheskoj theories, and preferences are given, first of all, evoljutsionno - to sociological methods.
Between sights "old" institutsionalistov (T.Veblen, J. The Clod - mons, U.Mitchell) and representatives new institutsionalnoj it is possible to allocate with school three basic distinctions.
First, "old" institutsionalisty moved from the right and a policy - to economy, trying to approach to the analysis of problems of the property by means of methods of other sciences about company. neoinstitutsionalisty go opposite by — study politological, legal and many other things problems of social studies by means of methods of a neoclassical economic theory.
Secondly, "old" institutsionalizm based, first of all, on an inductive method, went from special cases to generalisations therefore methodology of the general institutsionalnoj theories and have not developed. neoinstitutsionalisty use a deductive method, passing from the general principles of a neoclassical economic theory to an explanation concrete institutsionalnyh forms.
Thirdly, "old" institutsionalizm mainly paid to attention collective actions (in the first the states and the governments) on protection of interests of the individual whereas neoinstitutsionalizm makes the corner-stone of changes of individual behaviour under effect transformatsionnyh the processes occurring at set social and economic institutes.
The founder of the concept of postindustrial company D.Bell noticed, that the modern company differs from the previous epoch the posteconomic orientation that transforms all its institutes including a private property institution which
Acquires lines "razmytosti". It is echoed also by P.Draker time and again underlining, that the acting private property institution not always appears effective economic institute for all objects of the property (for example, for copyrights and intellectual property). Moreover, he considers, that today in general the private property on material and financial assets any more does not bring to the owner of that economic power which it could have earlier. The source of the economic power, according to P.Drakera, was displaced towards is intellectual-information resources.
Not less known representative of this direction O.Toffler believes, that in the conditions of "superindustrial" company in which the power of the state and corporations decreases, traditional forms of the organisation of a private property prestajut to be effective. Therefore he considers as more effective form of the organisation of the large property not a traditional principle of a hierarchical vertical of bureaucracy, and a principle adhokratii, when each organizational component of the company represents the module interacting with others (as on a vertical, and across), created for the decision of one konkrentnoj problems. All it, according to O.Tofflera, will allow corporation to adapt to the changeable economic, technological and social environment of modern company.
To new branch institutsionalizma, the J adjoins. K.Gelbrejt and its theory tehnostruktury. In its opinion, in modern company «the power has passed from separate persons to the organisations having group individuality». Characteristics of individuals of races -
smatrivajutsja it as function institutsionalnoj the environment caused tehnostrukturoj.
Symptomatically, that a number of others postindustrialistov (in particular, J.Gorovits), speaking about theoretical approaches of the given concept, notice, that concepts of this doctrine adjoin with marksovym the approach and recognise an unconditional priority To, Marx directed by a question on interaction of economic and legal systems of company. Moreover, at the analysis of historical evolution of relations of the property postindustriali - sty quite often use the formulations practically coinciding with marksovymi. Not without reason some authors even name this direction institutsionalnogo the analysis «the corrected and advanced historical materialism».
At the same time the approach of the postindustrial theory is directly opposite K.Marx's to approach. So, if in the Marxist theory the primacy of production in theories of postindustrial company as the common denominator environment - circulation sphere acts "vneproizvodstvennaja" is proclaimed. In a sense it marks return to classical, domarksistskoj politekonomicheskoj traditions in understanding of company as posledova-telnoj chains of mutual exchanges.
From items makroinstitutsio - nalnogo the approach works in J are devoted consideration of institute of the property. Buchanan which unlike other researchers gave paramount significance to the analysis of social norms and rules.
Private property existence - freedom prominent aspect, and in this sense it represents self-sufficing value, therefore
The big place in theory a public choice takes the state, or-ganizujushchee functioning of social institutes, including in-stituta properties. The central position in theoretical konstruk-tsii Buchanan is taken away to differentiation of two different functions gosudarst-va: «the states protecting» and «the states making». The first function of the state grows out institutsionalnogo of the agreement of people, and its fulfilment serves as the original guarantor of observance by them of the constitutional agreement. Maintenance of observance of the rights in company means jump from anarchy to the political organisation.
The second function represents the state as the manufacturer of public goods at the expense of, first of all, state ownership. Thus, as underlined Buchanan, fulfilment of the first function of the state serves as the original guarantor of fulfilment of its second function. As it is underlined in work JI. Beskera, the private property has following advantages: « I) it increases well-being of company, giving of resources in charge those who can dispose of them better others; 2) it encourages eksperimentirovanie and innovations because when the resource belongs to one person, it does not need to convince others or any state bodies of the new idea; 3) it promotes effective distribution of risk as the probable costs connected with this or that activity, fall on those who directly attends to it and consequently they appear are interested in specialising and becoming experts in an estimation of risks of this type; 4) it protects interests of the future generations, inducing some subjects to switch resources from current consumption to achievement of the long-time purposes laying quite often behind their horizon own sushchest-vovanija; 5) it protects the most despised categories of the population bla -
godarja to that on a labour market there is a competitiveness among set of private employers \".
Though the spectrum of the problems decided by the theory of a public choice, is wide enough, but is real its range is defined by social priorities of construction and functioning of public institutes, therefore the large part of efforts has been devoted development of the whole set of rules which would interfere with state development in a direction avtokraticheskogo a mode.
The theory of the property rights was issued in special section of an economic theory in 60-70th of XX century At a source of the theory of the property rights there were R.Kouz and A.Alchijan's two known American economists. Among those who actively participated in its subsequent working out, it is possible to name J.Bartselja, J1. de Ales - si, G.Demsetsa, M.Jensena, D.Norga, R.Pozner, S.Pejovicha, O.Uiljamsona, E.Famu, E.Fjurubotna.
According to R.Kouzu who has entered concept \"transaktsionnye costs \", there is an interrelation between creation of firm and the external price mechanism. At firm creation the economy tran - saktsionnyh costs as set of contracts are replaced unique - the firm as that is supplied. The above level transaktsi - onnyh costs in comparison with costs of coordination in firm, the occurs replacement of the market by firms more actively, there are processes of horizontal and vertical integration more intensively.
Ideas Kouza have begun several directions of development of the theory of the property. According to O.Uiljamsona's interpretation, the analysis of contract relations is divided into researches institutsionalnoj environments of the conclusion of bargains, on the one hand, and the organisations, - with other. In the
Turn, company "game rules" at research institutsionalnoj environments serve as object of the theory of a public choice; "game rules" in-dividualnyh agents - object of the theory of the property rights; anticipate-telnye agreements within the limits of the analysis of the organisations - an agency theory subject; the realised agreements — a theory subject transaktsionnyh costs.
Representatives of alternative directions neoinstitutsionalnoj to the theory follow different submissions about firm and according to it form differing programs of research both interfirm, and the intrafirm organisation institutsionalnoj environments.
According to classification Uiljamsona, three basic are allocated is-tochnika occurrence transaktsionnyh costs:
The limited rationality - inability of participants of the contract to predict all variants of the future events and to produce a corresponding plan of action;
Risk of opportunism which one of the parties in the bargain (bears at least possibility of occurrence of losses it is connected with self-interested behaviour of the counterpart);
Specificity of assets - inevitability of losses of a product of the factor of production at failure of its stipulated use.
At occurrence of any of these three collisions possibility to consider the accumulated experience of the conceptual building proceeding in each of "compartments" institutsionalnoj of the theory, for the purpose of a finding of unity of methodological bases and formation is essentially important sob -
stvennoj bases. Efficiency of the market decreases in comparison with long-term contracts and vertical integration.
In frameworks neoinstitutsionalnoj traditions exist disagreements concerning most general criterion of comparison "market" and «not market controlling mechanisms the property. One of the basic problems institutsionalnoj theories -« manufacturing or purchase »(make-or-buy de-cision) - is object of various interpretations.
K.Errou connected advantages of market management methods with economy transaktsionnyh costs on information acquisition. According to its point of view, possibility of effective information gathering are essentially increased within the limits of uniform firm.
A.Alchijan and G.Demzets focus attention on co-production (work in a command) as a sufficient condition of occurrence of firm. In their opinion, the economy on costs of monitoring of behaviour of the counterpart which is made the corner-stone by many other things authors, can be reached and without transition to hierarchical principles of coordination, in particular, thanks to long-term contracts. Co-production does effective replacement of the multilateral contract of holders of factors of production with a network of bilateral contracts between them and the businessman as that. At such approach opposition of firm and the market loses sense: the firm is considered as a network of contracts.
The concept «institutsionalnyj a bunch of the property rights» on mikroinstitutsionalnom level offered A.Onore, includes eleven elements:
The vested interest understood as the exclusive physical control over a thing, or as the right of its exclusive use;
The right of use of a thing or personal use when it does not include two subsequent competences;
The management right, i.e. The right to decide as well as whom the thing can be used;
The right to the income, i.e. to those blessings which gives realisations of two previous authorities;
The right to alienation, consumption, expenditure at own discretion, change or thing destruction;
The warranty from ekspropriatsii or the right to safety;
The right to descend a thing;
Indefiniteness;
Prohibition to use a thing to the detriment of other;
Possibility otobranija things in redemption of a debt;
Residual character, i.e. expectation of "natural return» competences transmitted to someone after the transfer expiry of the term.
Allocation of partial competences is made by it with reference to the borders separating the proprietor and resources present at it from other proprietors.
The named eleven elements give a large quantity a clod-binatsy, therefore the concrete property right can cover only some of the indicated elements. Hence, on same imushche-stvo there can be simultaneously some property rights. Thus, by estimates of the American economist G.Bekker, «existence about 1500 variants of the property rights is possible. This quantity
Still repeatedly increases if to consider and the purposes of each corresponding right ».
It is possible to consider the similar list standard for modern theorists of the property rights though it is possible to meet and other classification of "a bunch of the rights» which results, for example S.Chen: «the Blessing or property are defined as being in a private property in only case when when three distinctive signs are connected with the rights to possession of them. First, the use exclusive right (or decisions on use) the blessing which can be considered as the right to an exception of other individuals from its use. Secondly, the exclusive right to acquisition of income from thing use. Thirdly, the complete right to transfer or free alienation of property which includes the right to conclude contracts and to choose their form. This structure of the rights defining a private property, is, of course, the idealisation intended for the theoretical analysis; in practice exclude-telnost and peredavaemost the rights are degree questions».
Nevertheless the property right - not simply arithmetic sum of competences, and system of the interconnected elements. Their interdependence is shown in that, how much restriction of any competence (up to its complete removal) influences possibility of realisation of other competences.
The "complete" set of the rights of a private property has the important information and motivational advantages. It induces economic subjects to inform through market prices the information on the production potentialities and consumer preferences that promotes acceptance of the most effective decisions increasing well-being of all company. Thanks to differentiation \"a bunch of the rights \"
Private property partial competences can free gemmate, be differentiated, be combined and rekombinirovat - sja. With the purposes of our research defensible specially to stay on the characteristic "rekombinirovannoj" properties.
Under rekombinirovannoj the property discrepancy of legally fixed property rights and a real embodiment, washing out of mechanisms of the control and organizational borders of the economic subject is understood. After all besides legal owners of the vested interest - administrations, external investors - functions of the control over enterprise functioning are carried out also by its accessory manufacturers - principal suppliers, marketing firms and consumers.
The basic sense of occurrence rekombinirovannoj properties consists in creation of such preconditions for an operative regrouping and consolidation of factors of the production which are at the command of the enterprise which would allow economic subjects to hedge and distribute the economic risks.
The significant volume of mutual defaults of payment of the enterprises in the Russian economy assumes existence of mechanisms of the mutual control allowing the enterprises to continue the existence. In case of occurrence of threat of bankruptcy the enterprise can find resources for carrying out of the obligations, having rearranged the assets. Nevertheless the legal structure of the Russian institute of the property not to the full reflects the qualitative characteristic of a real economic situation at which the vested interest is distributed between many economic subjects.
Rekombinirovannaja the property is based on efficiency of redistribution of competences between external and internal sosobstvennikami, i.e. between administration, accessory manufacturers and labour collective. The nature rekombinirovannoj properties allows it to adapt and peregruppi -
r
rovyvatsja together with each change of a tactical situation in the market, including at occurrence of new effective proprietors.
Washing out of the property rights takes place, when they either is inexact are established and badly protected, or restriction sorts (first of all - from the state) qualify under different: «... What concrete having convicted did not accept washing out, it means existence of restrictions on the right of the holder to change the form, a site or a substance of property and to transmit all rights under the mutually acceptable price». In this case the feedback between decisions of economic subjects and results received by them is infringed.
Weakening exclusiveness and otchuzhdaemost the property rights, restrictions reduce degree rynochnosti economy. Any restrictions narrow a field of an economic choice, reconstruct expectations of economic subjects, reduce for them value of resources, change exchange conditions.
In this sense it is useful to compare processes of restriction and property right splitting. At that, and other introduces a dynamic element to developed system of relations of the property. But between them there are basic distinctions. Otpochkovyvanie separate competences occurs in the form of a bilateral voluntary exchange at the initiative of proprietors. Restrictions are imposed, as a rule, under compulsion, and thus the competence is not pirated by the state more often, and in general is withdrawn from a turn-over. Therefore the actions of the state directed on an establishment of similar restrictions, appear at theorists of the property rights under aprioristic suspicion. After all often it "washes away" the property rights in interests of various lobbist groups, being guided by redistributive reasons.
At the same time theoretically opposition of the self-restrictions voluntary taken up by economic agents, and the compulsory restrictions entered by the state admits, that a reality, in many cases does not work: «No accurate border separates the restrictions of the rights which are growing out of private agreements, from the restrictions getting under jurisdiction of courts or the compulsory control of the government»
Besides, nobody asserts, that exact definition of all competences at any cost is necessary. From the economic point of view, spetsi-fikatsija should go to that limit where the further prize from preodo-lenija razmytosti the rights any more does not pay back the expenses connected with it. Therefore existence of a wide class of resources with dim or neustanovlen th rights to them - the normal phenomenon which is present at all eko-nomikah. However depending on size and structure of the given class they can differ hardly on efficiency level.
It the importance in the economic analysis of the property rights special opinion speaks the problem of their specification and washing out takes. According to S.Pejovicha and E.Fjurubotna, it is a nucleus of the modern theory of firm because through it difficult feedback between the property and forms of the organisation of economic activities are opened. As the specification is called exact definition of a set pra-vomochy the proprietor. It acts as the major condition of effective work of economy. The specification of the rights reduces uncertainty eko-nomicheskoj environments and forms at individuals of expectation concerning that, on what they can expect as a result of own actions and in relations with other economic agents. Than better spetsifitsi -
rovany the property rights also are more reliably protected, they represent the big value to those.
The perfect (ideal) economic-theoretical model of a private property would mean the exhaustive specification and absolute protection of all competences. It is clear, that such it would be possible only in the ideal world where any as much as difficult specification would manage free of charge. In the real world where specification costs can be very great, it is far not all rights are precisely defined, unequivocally distributed and reliably protected. In "time" between precisely specified sets of the rights there are zones with high degree of uncertainty.
Accuracy of the specification depends on balance of expected benefits from it both costs for an establishment and right protection. The more value of a resource, the is more number pritjazatelej on it, and the it is more stimulus to an establishment of the exact rights. It is possible to tell, that specification degree should correspond to degree of a rarity of various resources. The cost value by definition of the contents and protection of the rights will fluctuate depending on physical characteristics of resources also accuracy of the property rights established on them, accordingly, will fluctuate.
First of all the specification assumes investment with the property rights of strictly certain persons: «... To exclude other of an easy approach to a resource means to specify the property rights to it». Besides, it is necessary to define precisely borders of object of the property, and also methods of investment and protection of the rights to it.
At last, the property rights require protection. Not protected right not is the right in general. Not to remain purely nominal, competences should be not only are defined, but also supplied by effective sanctions. Protection mechanisms can be various - from vos -
A food in members of company of certain behavioural stereotypes and moral condemnation of infringers before threat of personal revenge and judicial from-vetstvennosti (in the latter case sanctions can act in shape a clod-pensatsii for the damage caused in the past, an interdiction for repetition of actions in the future, criminal punishment).
The choice of sanctions will be dictated by a parity connected with each of them of costs and benefits. The specification is expressed available to the complete information on the proprietor, on object of the property and the rights connected with it and restrictions, about methods of an establishment and protection of these rights. The the big value is represented by the right, the be more exact and more authentic the information concerning it should. For example, all bargains with the earth are subject to usually obligatory registration in the special register. It is done that any future buyer could make sure, that the seller really is the holder of a plot and to exclude possible disputes in the future. It is obvious, that various variants of the specification of objects of the property, and also methods of an establishment and protection of the rights to them far are not equivalent and demand unequal expenses.
Thus, the modern economic science has far promoted in the analysis of theoretical model of the property, and a state ownership - in particular. At the same time characteristics of the developed ry-night institute of the property not always are sufficient for analysis realisation transformatsionnyh processes. Also it would be erroneous to think, that theoretical defects are limited to theory frameworks, theoretical errors and defects always affect practice.
<< | >>
A source: DIKINOV ANDZOR HASLNBIEVICH. FORMATION OF SYSTEM AND CONTROLLING MECHANISMS PROPERTY COMPLEXES OF THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN REGION. 2002

More on topic 1.1. Market specificity of management in the conditions of system transformation of territorial economic systems:

  1. Go Show-dzhi. FREE ECONOMIC ZONES AS the TOOL of MARKET TRANSFORMATION of ECONOMIC SYSTEM. ISSERTATSIJA on competition of a scientific degree of a Cand.Econ.Sci. St.-Petersburg,
  2. Go Show-dzhi. FREE ECONOMIC ZONES AS the TOOL of MARKET TRANSFORMATION of ECONOMIC SYSTEM (ON MATERIALS of the Peoples Republic of China). The DISSERTATION on scientific degree competition kavdvdata economic sciences. St.-Petersburg -, 1998 1998
  3. the contents 2 Introduction 3 Chapter I: Essence of free economic zones and their version 1.1 Essence, the purposes, problems and conditions of formation of free economic zones of 12 1.2 Versions of free economic zones and their classification 35 Head P: Formation of free economic zones in SRV 2.1 Market transformation of economy - a main condition of formation SEZ in modern Vietnam 62 2.2 Process of formation SEZ in Vietnam 88 Chapter III: Significance SEZ of Vietnam and way it is raised
  4. Theoretical bases of functioning of the market of the real estate: economic essence, specificity and structure
  5. on specialisation «the management Theory economic systems»
  6. Social and economic development of regions in the conditions of economy transformation
  7. 1.3. Market transformation of system of higher education in Russia
  8. 4.1. Privatisation - a method of market transformation of a regional control system of the state property
  9. CHAPTER 1. THE ANALYSIS OF EXISTING COMPUTER SYSTEMS, METHODS AND DEVICES OF TRANSFORMATION OF VOLTAGE FOR MANAGEMENT OF COOLING OF PRODUCTS
  10. Theoretical bases of strategic management of economic systems
  11. 1.2. Institutsionalnye changes, transformation of the contents of system of relations concerning a state ownership during an economic reform
  12. 1.1 Theoretical aspects of management of economic systems
  13. 3.1. Specificity of the organisation of system of controlling at the enterprises of the industry of tourism in the conditions of crisis
  14. 1. TEORETIKO-METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS of HYPOTHECARY CREDITING of PURCHASE of HOUSING ACCOMMODATION In MARKET ECONOMIC SYSTEMS
  15. a system synthesis of management of machining and analysis system spektrozonalnyh images in the conditions of the incomplete information on the basis of a method of analytical designing
  16. the chapter I. The economic maintenance of the bank credit in the conditions of the market
  17. the Market of the corporate control as system of economic relations
  18. 1.1.2 Bases of a system analysis, principles of management of systems