Skip to main content

Regulation of Interregional Value Chains: Problems of Analysis and Modeling

Studies on Russian Economic Development volume 33, pages 11–21 (2022)Cite this article

Abstract—

The article summarizes the results of research into analysis and modeling of interregional value chains (IRVCs). The necessity of developing state policy aimed at IRVC development is substantiated. The existing analytical and modeling tools for improving the quality of management of these processes are systematized and tested. The primary directions and instruments of IRVC regulation are presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.

Notes

  1. And also in “zones of confidence,” primarily the EAEU.

  2. Note that in the Spatial Development Strategy, significant importance for the task of eliminating imbalances in the economy and territorial development is given to the macroregional level, to strengthening interregional ties, i.e., essentially, to IRVC development.

  3. According to Web of Science data, 13.5 thousand publications that mention “value chain” have been published globally since 1987, in recent years about 1300–1500 new publications on the topic appear per year; in Russia, according to RSCI data, 329 publications have been published since 2008.

  4. Source: EDB Integration barometer—2017, St. Petersburg: Eurasian Development Bank Center for Integration Studies, 2017.

  5. Applied to industries of different regions involved in adding value, this decomposition turns into IRVCs.

  6. By volume of final consumption of products.

  7. By gross added value created by a given industry.

  8. For reference: the global average value of D in 2011 was 2.15. The 2011 value of D in Russia, according to our estimate, was 1.90.

  9. In 2011–2014 the average annual GDP growth rate decreased from 4.3% to 0.7%. Gross fixed capital formation slowed down from 109.1% in 2011 to 97.9% in 2014.

  10. An early version of a regional model that recognizes only one spatial effect – the unilateral effect of changes in exogenous demand on the output of “national” and “regional” products identified in the region.

REFERENCES

  1. R. Kaplinsky, “Globalisation and unequalisation: What can be learned from value chain analysis?,” J. Dev. Stud. 37 (2), 117–146 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1080/713600071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Yu. A. Kurganov, “Development of industrial cooperation in the Russian automotive industry under the sanctions,” Ross. Vneshneekon. Vestn., No. 1, 119–127 (2016).

  3. A. V. Gavrilyuk, “Science-and-technology and industrial cooperation: development trends,” Gos. Upr. Elektron. Vestn., No. 56, 114–133 (2016).

  4. G. Hanson, R. J. Mataloni, and M. J. Slaughter, “Vertical production networks in multinational firms,” Rev. Econ. Stat. 87 (4), 664–678 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. A. R. Sayapova, “Quantitative parameters of global value chains in macrostructural forecasting,” Stud. Russ. Econ. Dev. 29, 617–624 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. R. E. Miller and U. Temurshoev, “Output upstreamness and input downstreamness of industries/countries in world production,” Int. Reg. Sci. Rev. 40 (5), 443–475 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017615608095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yu. S. Ershov, “Regionalization of national economic input-output tables,” EKO, No. 6, 119–138 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  8. E. V. Lukin, “Sectoral and territorial specifics of value chains in Russia: an intersectoral approach,” Ekon. Sots. Peremeny: Fakty, Tendentsii, Prognoz 12 (6), 129–149 (2019). .https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2019.6.66.7]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. T. Fally, On the Fragmentation of Production in the US (University of Colorado-Boulder, Boulder, CO, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  10. E. Kutsenko, E. Islankina, and A. Kindras, “Smart by oneself? An analysis of Russian regional innovation strategies within the RIS3 framework,” Foresight STI Governance 12 (1), 25–45 (2018). https://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2018.1.25.45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. A. G. Granberg, et al., Optimization Interregional Intersectoral Models (Novosibirsk, 1989) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  12. A. A. Shirov, A. R. Sayapova, and A. A. Yantovskii, “Integrated input-output balance as an element of analysis and forecasting in the post-soviet space,” Stud. Russ. Econ. Dev. 26, 7–14 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. J. Oosterhaven and G. Hewings, Interregional Input-Output Models in Handbook of Regional Science (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2014), pp. 875–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23430-9_43

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. D. B. Fuller, V. J. M. F. Filhoa, and E. F. de Arruda, “Oil industry value chain simulation with learning agents,” Comput. Chem. Eng. 111, 199–209 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2018.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. C. Keramydas, D. Aidonis, and D. Bechtsis, “Agent-based simulation for modeling supply chains: a comparative case study,” Int. J. New Technol. Res. 2 (10), 36–39 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  16. V. I. Suslov, et al., “Agent-based multi-regional input-output model of the Russian economy,” Ekon. Mat. Metody 52 (1), 112–131 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  17. E. V. Lukin, et al., “Experience in agent-based modeling of interregional value chains,” Ekon. Sots. Peremeny: Fakty, Tendentsii, Prognoz 13 (6), 101–116 (2020). https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2020.6.72.6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. I. V. Naumov, “Investigation of interregional relationships in the formation of the investment potential of the territory by methods of spatial modeling,” Ekon. Reg. 15 (3), 720–735 (2019). https://doi.org/10.17059/2019-3-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. V. A. Kryukov, et al., “Problems of development of a unified complex of means of macroeconomic interregional intersectoral analysis and forecasting,” Ekon. Reg. 16 (4), 1072–1086 (2020). https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2020-4-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. M. Matsui, “Management game theory: manufacturing vs. service enterprise type,” Int. J. Prod. Qual. Manage. 1 (1–2), 103–115 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPQM.2006.008376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. G. Keshelashvili, “Value chain management in agribusiness,” Int. J. Bus. Manag. 6 (2), 59–77 (2018). https://doi.org/10.20472/BM.2018.6.2.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Á. Mesterházy, J. Oláh, and J. Popp, “Losses in the Grain Supply Chain: Causes and Solutions,” Sustainability 12 (2342), 1–18 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. T. Kim, J. W. Cheong, J.-H. Lee, M. Shin, N. R. Park, and Y. Kim, “Strategies to strengthen industrial cooperation with major emerging countries in Southeast Asia,” World Econ. Update 4 (10), (2014). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2436804

  24. T. Aronsson and E. Koskela, Optimal Income Taxation, Outsourcing and Policy Cooperation in a Dynamic Economy: CESifo Working Paper No. 2776 (CESifo, Munich, 2009).

  25. A. V. Kotov, “Determining the smart specialization of Russian regions in the context of domestic and European experience,” Reg. Res. Russ. 11, 378–386 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970521030084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. J. Paap, “Mapping the technological landscape to accelerate innovation,” Foresight STI Governance 14 (3), 41–54 (2020). https://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2020.3.41.54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. R. N. Roux, E. van der Lingen, and A. P. Botha, “A systematic literature review on the titanium metal product value chain,” S. Afr. J. Ind. Eng. 30 (3), 115–133 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  28. E. Kutsenko and Y. Eferin, “Whirlpools” and “safe harbors” in the dynamics of industrial specialization in Russian regions,” Foresight STI Governance 13 (3), 24–40 (2019). https://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2019.3.24.40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. A. Bosch and N. Vonortas, “Smart specialization as a tool to foster innovation in emerging economies: lessons from Brazil,” Foresight STI Governance 13 (1), 32–47 (2019). https://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2019.1.32.47

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The study was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project no. 20-110-50491 “Regulation of interregional value chains: problems of analysis and modeling.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vologda Research Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, 160014, Vologda, Russia

    E. V. Lukin

Authors
  1. E. V. Lukin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. V. Lukin.

Additional information

Translated by A. Ovchinnikova

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lukin, E.V. Regulation of Interregional Value Chains: Problems of Analysis and Modeling. Stud. Russ. Econ. Dev. 33, 11–21 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1075700722010117

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1075700722010117

Keywords:

  • interregional value chains
  • analysis
  • interindustry models
  • input-output models
  • agent-oriented models
  • regulation
  • smart specialization