Search results

The article defines main directions of the future development of investment activity on rail transport. Objective need of the industry investment management based on development of macroeconomic trends is justified. Shown a transfer mechanism of actions of main directions of investment activity of railways that will serve the integration movement of Ukrainian economy to the harmonious development model as well as shown the system of coordination of directions and goals of railways investment development. Due to the meaning and specificity of rail transport activity, the article points out that the problems of industry investment should be considered at the level of national issues as the effect of investment activity will be extended to various areas of the national economy. Based on the analysis of the theoretical foundations and practical features of the conditions for the effective management of investment processes on railway transport, describes the possibility of the development trends of investment within the various levels of government.

The authors consider current status and prospects of Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the group of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa). It is argued that both are formed by big quickly growing economies. This provides a good potential of economic cooperation. The authors single out the following factors. First of all, all member countries show positive dynamics of economic development. GDP in BRICS and SCO countries grew at the beginning of the XXI century significantly faster than in integration associations built by developed countries (EU, NAFTA). In general, the largest growing economies are on the raising wave of economic cycle and they invest a significant portion of national income into development. This secures them a benefit against developed countries. Secondly, the countries of SCO and BRICS possess vast human potential which is rapidly growing both quantitatively and qualitatively. Thirdly, they are rich in natural resources – in terms of both minerals and agro-climatic conditions. That is why these countries can economically complement each other. BRICS countries already practice economic partnership in a number of spheres – financial, agricultural, scientific and technological. As for investment partnership, the favorable prospects exist for carrying out multilateral mega-projects within BIRCS and SCO. Russia is especially interested in power engineering. Other prospective spheres include airspace, transportation infrastructure, environmental protection, education and vocational training. An important incentive to enhancing cooperation is common strive for transition from conservative resource-based type of development to the innovative economy. Acknowledgments. The article has been supported by the Program of Ural Division of RAS № 14 "Fundamental Problems of Regional Economies, 2015–2017".

The tendencies of development of world and Russian economy in new post-crisis terms are analyzed. Fundamental changes are revealed related both to redistribution in global scales of economic influence and structural shifts in the world economy. The influence of new industrialization is analyzed as the most important factor of current economic development in the post-industrial world. The expediency of using the tools of public-private partnership in the Russian economy is discussed that presupposes more active and precise position of the state in formulating and reaching the priorities of country's socio-economic development.

International audience ; The report presents the first results of an analysis of informational-analytical institutions ("brain centres", "think tanks") in ten CIS countries and Georgia, discloses the reasons for the increasing role of expert knowledge in the social and political life of post-Soviet states, charts their development in tune with global trends, outlines the typology of think tanks, and shows the organization of analytical communities in different countries. ; В докладе представлены первые результаты анализа состояния информационно-аналитических учреждений ("мозговые центры", "фабрики мысли") 10 стран СНГ и Грузии, раскрыты причины возрастания роли экспертного знания в общественно-политической жизни государств постсоветского пространства, выявлены созвучные мировым тенденции их развития, дана типология аналитических центров, показаны особенности организации аналитических сообществ отдельных стран.

The article continues the series of articles in memory of Aleksandr Petrovich Bychkov, honorary citizen of Tomsk, rector of Tomsk State University (TSU) (1967–1983) and head of the Department of Political Economy of TSU (1966–1991). The article focuses on the fundamental scientific works of Aleksandr Bychkov as the founder of the Property and Economic Relations scientific school at the TSU Department of Political Economy. During his life (1921–2009), Professor Bychkov undoubtedly managed to build a successful model for the organization and development of scientific knowledge, and a system of continuous professional development for political economy instructors. Holding the high post of the TSU rector for a long time, Professor Bychkov managed to gather his associates in the field of economic education around himself and raise a lot of students and followers, numerous candidates and doctors of economic sciences, faculty and heads of political economy departments of universities in Siberia and the Far East. Professor Bychkov formulated and implemented a highly controversial long-term research program in two sectors (collective farms and the state) and two forms of public ownership in agriculture (kolkhoz–cooperative and state), from which his scientific school developed. Professor Bychkov traced the evolution from the emergence of a collective form of ownership to collective farm forms of land management. The fact that this research program deserves the status of a major scientific problem in the USSR is proved by the scientific session of the USSR Academy of Sciences on the history of peasant and collective farm construction in the USSR, held in Moscow in the period between Bychkov's defenses of his candidate of science (1955) and doctor of science (1966) dissertations. According to Professor Bychkov, property relations in their economic essence should be separated from their legal expression and should include the entire set of production relations of people in the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods.