Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theory and Practice of Assessing the Efficiency of Urban Agglomeration Administration Abroad and in Russia (a Case Study of Chelyabinsk Oblast)

  • URBAN STUDIES
  • Published:
Regional Research of Russia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The efficiency of urban agglomeration administration has so far not been an object of close attention for researchers. The article proposes to evaluate it with respect to the contractual administration model based on three components, i.e., evaluate the overall efficiency of administering the development of the agglomeration as the degree of achievement of the goals of agglomeration interaction, the political efficiency of making and implementing decisions, and the managerial efficiency of implementing agglomeration projects. The approach is theoretically substantied, and the results of a study of the efficiency of agglomeration administration are presented with a case study of the agglomerations of Chelyabinsk oblast. Summarizing the results of the study based on the above three components, the authors conclude the following. First, in a broad sense, the goal of development of an agglomeration (and its administration) is to strengthen the competitiveness of the agglomeration in global, national, or at least large interregional markets and to increase its contribution to development of the economy and society. Second, efficiency (making and implementing decisions) under conditions of the contractual model of agglomeration administration implies a key role of the coordinating body, which consists in finding and achieving a balance of interests of the participants, preparing and agreeing on draft decisions, and monitoring and controlling their implementation. In fact, the efficiency of agglomeration administration is closely related to the efficiency of the coordinating body. Third, the efficiency (more precisely, success) of agglomeration administration by assessing the implementation of agglomeration projects, in turn, depends on the chosen mechanisms and forms for carrying out such projects. Analysis of the Russian practice of urban agglomeration administration, with a case study of Chelyabinsk oblast (the Chelyabinsk agglomeration and Gorny Ural agglomeration), made it possible to test these theoretical conclusions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See also: The impacts of metropolitan regions on their surrounding areas. Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy and EU Budget, 2019. https://cor.europa.eu/en/engage/studies/Documents/Metropolitan-regions.pdf .

  2. See: The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) project. http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/#home; 12 Principles of Good Governance. https://www.coe.int/en/web/good-governance/12-principles.

  3. For this approach, it is more correct to speak about the effectiveness (or success) of agglomeration administration, not about efficiency in the exact sense of the word. See below for more details.

  4. See: Satzung des Region Koln/Bonn e.V. vom 05. September 2018, § 2. https://www.region-koeln-bonn.de/uploads/media/180905_RegionKoelnBonn_Satzung.pdf (translated from the german by E. Markwart).

  5. See: Gesetz uber die Metropolregion Frankfurt/Rhein-Main (MetropolG) vom 8. März 2011, § 1. https://www.rv.hessenrecht.hessen.de/bshe/document/jlr-MetrRegFrankfGHEframe.

  6. See: Gesetz uber den Regionalverband Ruhr (RVRG) vom 3. Februar 2004. https://recht.nrw.de/lmi/owa/br_bes_text?sg=0&menu=1&bes_id=5244&aufgehoben=N&anw_nr=2 (translation from German and compilation by E. Markwart).

  7. Assuming that such goals would generally be set by individual participants in the absence of agglomeration interaction.

  8. An example of the rationale for the choice of indicators, sources of their receipt and approach to calculation can be found in the study of the Initiative Group “European Metropolises in Germany” within the “Models of Spatial Organization” project (2007), initiated by the corresponding federal ministry (https://www.region-stuttgart.org/mdex.php?eID=dumpFile&t=f&f=815&token=f9ecf555ad6bfd5824bee799ac099514996da931, p. 10).

  9. See: Bundesamt fur Bauwesen und Raumordnung. https://www.bbsr.bund.de/BBSR/DE/startseite/_node.html.

  10. See: Assessing the development of urban agglomerations. https://www.urbaneconomics.ru/sites/default/files/07.12_ocenka_ razvitosti_gorodskih_aglomeraciy.pdf.

  11. See: Interkommunale Zusammenarbeit Studie der Kienbaum Management Consultants GmbH in Kooperation mit dem Deutschen Stadte- und Gemeindebund. Dusseldorf, Juni 2004. https://docplayer.org/191835644-Interkommunale-cooperation-study-of-kienbaum-management-consultants-gmbh-in-cooperation-with-the-german-towns-and-community-day.html.

  12. See: Richtlinie fur Zuwendungen des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen zur Forderung der interkommunalen Zusammenarbeit. Runderlass des Ministeriums fur Heimat, Kommunales, Bau und Gleichstellung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen - 301 - 43.02.05/04 vom 31. August 2021. https://recht.nrw.de/lmi/owa/br_bes_text?anw_nr=1&gld_nr=2&ugl_nr=202&bes_id=46868&val=46868&ver=7&sg=0&aufgehoben=N&menu=1.

  13. See: GOST R 54870-2011: Project Management. Requirements for Project Portfolio Management. http://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200089605; GOST R 54869-2011: Project Management. Project Management Requirements. http://gostrf.eom/normadata/1/4293797/4293797785.pdf; GOST R 54871-2011: Project Management. Program Management Requirements. http://gostrf.eom/normadata/1/4293797/4293797787.pdf; GOST R ISO 21500-2014: Project Management Guide. http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4293765/4293765998.pdf.

  14. Agreement on the creation of the Gorny Ural agglomeration. https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http://www.karsob.ru/upload/iblock/22a/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5%20%D0%93%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9%20%D0%A3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BB.doc&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK.

  15. Agreement on the creation of the Gorny Ural agglomeration. https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.karsob.ru%2Fupload%2Fiblock%2F22a%2F%25D0% 25A1%25D0%25BE%25D0%25B3%25D0%25BB%25D0%25B0%25D1%2588%25D0%25B5%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D0%25B5%2520%25D0%2593%25D0%25BE%25D1%2580%25D0%25BD%25D1%258B%25D0%25B9%2520%25D0%25A3%25D1%2580%25D0%25B0%25D0%25BB.doc&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK.

  16. See: Strategy of Socioeconomic Development of Chelyabinsk oblast for the Period up to 2035. https://docs.cntd.ru/document/553133071?ysclid=I57x7p80lq421416409.

  17. Decree of the Government of Chelyabinsk oblast no. 387-P of August 3, 2020, On Approval of the Territorial Planning Scheme for a Part of the Territory of Chelyabinsk oblast (Zlatoust, Mias, Karabash, and Chebarkul Urban Okrugs, Kusinsky and Satkinsky Municipal Districts (the Territory of the Gorny Ural Agglomeration). https://docs.cntd.ru/document/570871608.

  18. Decision of the Chelyabinsk City Duma no. 52/6 of June 24, 2014, On Approval of the Agreement on the Creation of the Chelyabinsk Agglomeration. http://www.kapo-gorbunov.ru/index.php?docid=234882.

  19. It should be noted that the boundaries of the Chelyabinsk agglomeration in the territorial planning scheme do not coincide with the boundaries of the agglomeration in the current Strategy for the Socioeconomic Development of Chelyabinsk oblast (in the regional strategy, they are much wider and include the territories of the Argayashsky and Kunashaksky municipal districts). This allows us to claim “mobility” of ideas about the boundaries of the agglomeration, depending on the considered control loop: intermunicipal cooperation, regional management in the field of urban planning or regional management in the field of long-term socioeconomic development.

  20. Created Coordinating Council of Municipalities of the Chelyabinsk Agglomeration, August 31, 2015. http://www.deputat74.ru/content/sozdan-koordinatsionnyi-sovet-munitsipalnykh-obrazovanii-chelyabinskoi-aglomeratsii.

  21. Based on the report “Project ‘Modern City: The First Youth University for the Development of Agglomerations’” at the IV Forum of Best Municipal Practices of the Union of Russian Cities in Ufa (June 16–18, 2016).

  22. For more detail on the so-called redistribution of authority between municipalities and the federal subject and consequences thereof, see (Markwart, 2016).

  23. Service for verification and analysis of Russian legal entities and entrepreneurs. https://www.rusprofile.ru/id/10161284.

REFERENCES

  1. Abramov, R.A., Mukhaev, R.T., and Sokolov, M.S., Criteria for the effectiveness of state and regional management in the context of the project approach, Teor. Prikl. Ekon., 2017, no. 1, pp. 96–112.

  2. Akhremenko, A.S. and Yureskul, E.A., Efficiency of public administration: Political and economic approaches, Obshchestv. Nauki Sovrem., 2013, no. 1, pp. 77–88.

  3. Albert, S. and Theobald, D., Evolution von Governance-Strukturen der Europaischen Metropolregionen in Deutschland, Dissertation, TU Dortmund, 2012. https://eldorado.tu-dortmund.de/bitstream/2003/29890/1/Dissertation.pdf. Cited August 2, 2022.

  4. Antonov, E.V., Territorial concentration of the economy and population in European Union countries and Russia and the role of global cities, Reg. Res. Russ., 2020, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 360–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Antonov, E.V., Kulikov, D.A., and Savoskul, M.S., Urban agglomerations: Approaches to the definition and delimitation of boundaries, in Doklad o sostoyanii mestnogo samoupravleniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii: Mezhmunitsipal’noe sotrudnichestvo kak mekhanizm upravleniya gorodskimi aglomeratsiyami (Report on the State of Local Government in the Russian Federation: Inter-Municipal Cooperation as a Mechanism for Managing Urban Agglomerations), Ivanova, K.A. and Markwart, E., Eds., Moscow: Prospekt, 2021, pp. 44–69.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bratchenko, S.A., Kachestvo gosudarstvennogo upravleniya: teoreticheskii, metodologicheskii i institutsional’nyi aspekty: Doklad (Quality of Public Administration: Theoretical, Methodological and Institutional Aspects: Report), Moscow: Inst. Ekon. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Danielzyk, R. and Blotevogel, H.H., Leistungen und Funktionen von Metropolregionen, in Metropolregionen und Raumentwicklung (Metropolitan Regions and Spatial Development), Part 3: Metropolregionen. Innovation, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfahigkeit (Metropolitan Regions: Innovation, Competition, Ability to Act), Knie-ling, J., Ed., Hannover: ARL, 2009, pp. 22–29.

  8. Giuliano, G., Kang, S., and Yuan, Q., Agglomeration economies and evolving urban form, Ann. Reg. Sci., 2019, no. 63, pp. 377–398.

  9. Glazychev, V.L., Starodubrovskaya, I.V., Slavgorodskaya, M.Yu., Khrustalev, A.A., and Turuntsev, E.V., Chelyabinskaya aglomeratsiya: potentsial razvitiya (Chelyabinsk Agglomeration: Development Potential), Chelyabinsk, 2008.

  10. Gritsenko, E.V., Theoretical and legal foundations of the organization of public authority in urban agglomerations (comparative legal analysis), in Mestnoe samoupravlenie i razvitie territorii: rossiiskii i evropeiskii opyt (Local Self-Government and Development of Territories: Russian and European Experience), Perm: Perm. Nats. Issled. Politekh. Univ., 2014, pp. 387–412.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kaminskii, V.S, Effectiveness of public administration: An analysis of the main methods, Soc. Security Insights, 2019, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 13–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kiseleva, N.N., Kiselev, V.V., and Snopova, K.V., Agglomeration effect: Myth or reality?, in Doklad o sostoyanii mestnogo samoupravleniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii: Mezhmunitsipal’noe sotrudnichestvo kak mekhanizm upravleniya gorodskimi aglomeratsiyami (Report on the State of Local Government in the Russian Federation: Inter-Municipal Cooperation as a Mechanism for Managing Urban Agglomerations), Ivanova, K.A. and Markvart, E., Eds., Moscow: Prospekt, 2021, pp. 93–115.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Knieling, J. and Blatter, J.K., Metropolitan Governance: Institutionelle Strategien, Dilemmas und Variationsmoglichkeiten fur die Steuerung von Metropolregionen, in Metropolregionen und Raumentwicklung (Metropolitan Regions and Spatial Development), Part 3: Metropolregionen. Innovation, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfahigkeit (Metropolitan Regions: Innovation, Competition, Ability to Act), Knieling, J., Ed., Hannover: Verlag der ARL, 2009, pp. 223–269.

  14. Knorr, A., Okonomisierung der offentlichen Verwaltungeinige grundsatzliche ordnungstheoretische Anmerkungen, Bremen: IWIM, 2005. https://dopus.uni-speyer.de/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/3387/file/%c3%96konomisierung.pdf. Cited August 2, 2022.

  15. Kuznetsov, Yu.G., Management of urban agglomerations: methodological approaches, organizational and legal forms and practice, in Sovremennyi gorod: vlast’, upravlenie, ekonomika (Modern City: Power, Management, Economics), Perm: Perm: Perm. Nats. Issled. Politekh. Univ., 2018. https://www.urc.ru/node/122. Cited August 2, 2022.

  16. Lappo, G.M., Razvitie gorodskikh aglomeratsii v SSSR (Development of Urban Agglomerations in the USSR), Moscow: Nauka, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lappo, G., Urban agglomerations of the USSR–Russia: Features of dynamics in the 20th century, Ross. Ekspert. Obozr., 2007, nos. 4–5, pp. 6–9.

  18. Lappo, G.M. and Lyubovnyi, V.Ya., Largest urban agglomerations in Russia at the beginning of the 21st century: Status, problems, and approaches to solving them, Reg. Res. Russ., 2011, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 133–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lappo, G., Polyan, P., and Selivanova, T., Agglomerations of Russia in the 21st century. http://www.frrio.ru/uploads_files/Lappo.pdf. Cited August 2, 2022.

  20. Leksin, V.N., Effectiveness and efficiency of the activities of regional and municipal governments: purpose and possibility of a correct assessment, Reg. Res. Russ., 2013, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 277–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Leksin, V.N., Administrative reform and assessment of the quality of public administration, Tr. Inst. Sist. Anal. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2006, vol. 22, pp. 113–132.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Leksin, V.N., Effectiveness and efficiency of actions of regional and municipal authorities: The purpose and possibilities of a correct assessment, Reg.: Ekon. Sotsiol., 2012, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 3–39.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Loibl, W., Etminan, Gh., Gebetsroither-Geringer, E., Neumann, H.-M., and Sanchez-Guzman, S., Characteristics of urban agglomerations in different continents: History, patterns, dynamics, drivers and trends in Urban Agglomeration, Ergen, M., Ed., London: InTech,, 2018. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/59481. Cited August 2, 2022.

  24. Markwart, E., Competence of local self-government—A mutation in the course of another municipal reform, Probl. Teor. Prakt. Upr., 2016, no. 5, pp. 77–88.

  25. Markwart, E., Organizational and legal aspects of the contractual model of urban agglomeration management, in Doklad o sostoyanii mestnogo samoupravleniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii: Mezhmunitsipal’noe sotrudnichestvo kak mekhanizm upravleniya gorodskimi aglomeratsiyami (Report on the State of Local Government in the Russian Federation: Inter-Municipal Cooperation as a Mechanism for Managing Urban Agglomerations), Ivanova, K.A. and Markvart, E., Eds., Moscow: Prospekt, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Markwart, E. and Petukhov, R.V., Organizational and legal models of agglomeration management, Menedzh. Biz.-Adm., 2016, no. 3, pp. 12–27.

  27. Markwart, E. and Shvetsov, A.N., Territorial’naya organizatsiya mestnogo samoupravleniya i upravlenie gorodskimi aglomeratsiyami (Territorial Organization of Local Self-Government and Management of Urban Agglomerations), Moscow: Delo, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Markwart, E., Agapova, E.V., and Voblenko, S.V., Upravlenie khozyaistvennoi deyatel’nost’yu munitsipal’nykh obrazovanii: Uchebnoe posobie (Management of Economic Activities Of Municipalities: Textbook), Moscow: Prospekt, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mukhaev, R.T. and Abramova, O.G., Criteria for the effectiveness of modern systems of public administration: The problem of quantification of the quality of public administration, Fundam. Issled., 2016, no. 7-1, pp. 146–154.

  30. Pavlov, Yu.V. and Khmeleva, G.A., Properties of urban agglomeration management models, Upravlenie, 2021, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pavlov, Yu.V., Koroleva, E.N., and Evdokimov, N.N., Theoretical foundations of the formation of the urban agglomeration management system, Ekon. Reg., 2019, vol. 15, pp. 3, pp. 834–850.

  32. Popov, R.A. and Puzanov, A.S., Urban agglomerations: Methods of delimitation and management, in Doklad o sostoyanii mestnogo samoupravleniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii: Mezhmunitsipal’noe sotrudnichestvo kak mekhanizm upravleniya gorodskimi aglomeratsiyami (Report on the State of Local Government in the Russian Federation: Inter-Municipal Cooperation as a Mechanism for Managing Urban Agglomerations), Ivanova, K.A. and Markwart, E., Eds., Moscow: Prospekt, 2021, pp. 70–92.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Puzanov, A.S. and Popov, R.A., Analiz dokumentov strategicheskogo planirovaniya i programmnykh dokumentov regional’nogo i mezhmunitsipal’nogo urovnei na predmet otrazheniya v nikh voprosov razvitiya gorodskikh aglomeratsii (Analysis of Strategic Planning Documents and Program Documents of the Regional and Inter-Municipal Levels in Terms of Reflection of the Development of Urban Agglomerations in Them), Moscow: Fond Inst. Ekon. Goroda, 2018. https://www.urbaneconomics.ru/sites/default/files/aglacts2018.pdf. Cited August 2, 2022.

  34. Raisikh, A., On the issue of determining the boundaries of urban agglomerations: World experience and formulation of the problem, Demogr. Obozr., 2020, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 27–53.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Schulze, K. and Blotevogel, H.H., Zum Problem der Quantifizierung der Metropolfunktionen deutscher Metropolregionen, in Metropolregionen und Raumentwicklung (Metropolitan Regions and Spatial Development), Part 3: Metropolregionen. Innovation, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfahigkeit (Metropolitan Regions: Innovation, Competition, Ability to Act), Knieling, J., Ed., Hannover: ARL, 2009, pp. 30–58.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sestrukhina, A.O., Evaluation of the effectiveness of local development management: Terminological and methodological aspects, Munits. Ekon., 2011, no. 3, pp. 14–19.

  37. Shvetsov, A.N., Municipal-state management of urban agglomerations, Munits. Imushchestvo: Ekon., Pravo, Upr., 2018, no. 2, pp. 17–21.

  38. Shvetsov, A.N., Urban agglomerations in the transformation of urban space, Ross. Ekon. Zh., 2018, no. 1, pp. 45–65.

  39. Shvetsov, A.N., Structural transformations of the municipal space: Substantiation of expediency and evaluation of efficiency, Reg. Res. Russ., 2019, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 304–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Shvetsov, A.N., Stanovlenie novoi organizatsii ekonomicheskogo prostranstva Rossii: Opyt gosudarstvennogo regulirovaniya i nauchnykh issledovanii prostranstvennykh preobrazovanii (Formation of a New Organization of the Economic Space of Russia: Experience of State Regulation and Scientific Research of Spatial Transformations), Moscow: LENAND, 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Tsipes, G.L., Methods for evaluating the effectiveness of project-oriented activities: A review of the current state and development prospects, Upr. Proektami Program., 2009, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 190–215.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Vasil’eva, V.M., Kolesneva, E.A., Inshakov, I.A., Gosudarstvennaya politika i upravlenie: Uchebnik i praktikum (Public Policy and Management: Textbook and Tutorial), Moscow: Yurait, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Wollmann, H., Reformen in Kommunalpolitik und -verwaltung: England, Schweden, Frankreich und Deutschland im Vergleich (Reforms in Local Politics and Administration: Comparison of England, Sweden, France, and Germany), Wiesbaden: Wustenrot Stiftung, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Volkshochschule Moers–Kamp-Lintfort, Moers, Germany

    E. Markwart

  2. Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, 119571, Moscow, Russia

    D. P. Sosnin

  3. Chelyabinsk Branch, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, 454077, Chelyabinsk, Russia

    S. V. Nechaeva

Authors
  1. E. Markwart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. P. Sosnin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. V. Nechaeva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to E. Markwart, D. P. Sosnin or S. V. Nechaeva.

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Markwart, E., Sosnin, D.P. & Nechaeva, S.V. Theory and Practice of Assessing the Efficiency of Urban Agglomeration Administration Abroad and in Russia (a Case Study of Chelyabinsk Oblast). Reg. Res. Russ. 13, 725–738 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970523701083

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970523701083

Keywords:

Search

Navigation