Researchers from the Higher school of Economics, whose works are represented including extended until the end of may because of the epidemic of the XXI April conference of University and came to paradoxical conclusions — noting the ineffectiveness of the state in promoting productivity, they indicated the need for correction of such a policy in relation to non-oil companies. However, even if it succeeds, the effect on the economy will be small — it is therefore proposed to stimulate just the oil sector, which was the source of poor performance for the last ten years. In the Center of the HSE, in turn, noted that the growing volatility of the oil market in the future it could become a source of new crises.The HSE study “the Factors of growth of labour productivity at the enterprises of non-oil sectors of the Russian economy” prepared under the direction of Yuri Simachev on the basis of the results of the 2019 poll of heads of 713 firms from four sectors — industry, agriculture, transport and construction. Forest products, for example, industry leaders are ahead on this indicator other organizations more than eight times, in the chemical industry — more than six. “The orientation of state support for efficient companies leads to more growth of the gap between the leaders and outsiders (the latter is most often a small “old” company.— “Kommersant”)”,— stated in the study. The authors found that 13% of such companies ‘ performance does not affect competitiveness.The most productive were the major exporters and companies and agribusiness with a high level of investaccount and foreign participation. The main obstacles to the growth of efficiency — staffing (for leaders) and financial (to outsiders) deficit and limits the possibility of expanding sales. Less than 10% of firms introducing new products and technologies, enter new markets, a third of companies inert. The main incentive to increase productivity (and innovation) of the company called the tightening of the requirements and standards set by consumers and government, as well as an example of foreign companies, and it is believed that Western research is more important than the Russian (the development of Russian universities in the last place among stimuli), linear relationships of productivity growth with R & d expenses can not be traced. The main obstacle to the development of scientific-industrial societies — a high price studies. As output, it is proposed to stimulate output for export markets, not separate product groups and product technology-related clusters.Analysts say that performance makes no sense to talk in terms of an underdeveloped competitive environment, and propose to focus on its construction. The current national project to improve productivity focused on organizational issues — while the managers surveyed identified the following priorities as technological innovation and new equipment. Also all companies are important, not so much financial as tax incentives, which allows to choose the direction of improvement. The priority of the leaders, the promotion of digitization, facilitating access to foreign markets and access foreign technologies.Another team of HSE under the leadership of Ilya Voskoboynikov — analyzed the sources of growth of labor productivity in Russia after the crises of 1998 and 2008. The researchers concluded that the main and almost the only sector (other than agriculture, but its contribution to value added is only 4-5%), which can stimulate when coming out of the crisis, export oriented commodities and the oil and gas industry. He served as the stagnation of the economy after 2009, reducing the efficiency of production and ceasing of technological catch-up. “The drop in performance until 2019 due primarily not non-oil sectors and the oil and gas sector,”— said Ilya Voskoboynikov. According to him, the contribution of non-oil sectors to growth is relatively small and the success of that stimulus will not be noticeable at the aggregate level.The experts of the Center for development HSE noted that a focus on increasing productivity in the oil and gas sector promises only a short-term spurt, but could be even more painful economic decline. In their view, the Paris agreement could cause the race to be able to burn the last “allowed” a ton of hydrocarbons. “In this regard, it is highly likely new episodes of price wars, and the dynamics of the oil market will evolve in the framework of the already manifested a short 5-7-year cycles,” conclude the experts.Alexey Shapovalov
