2. The cause of the new global financial crisis is the bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia. A completely similar situation is emerging now, but at a new stage in the global development of industrial bourgeois-capitalist civilization. Prerequisites for the current global

Over the past five years since the beginning of the global financial and economic crisis of 2008-2009, the totality of the problems it caused has not lost its severity and relevance. If not in depth, then in scale and consequences, it can only be compared with the Great Depression of the 1930s. Having emerged in the mortgage segment of the US financial market, it quickly spread to the real sector and acquired planetary proportions. In its zone were countries and regions that differed in the level of development of productive forces, social and political orientation. The crisis affected more than 80 percent of the world economy (during the Great Depression - 92.4 percent). Only individual countries managed to maintain positive, but slow growth dynamics. According to its qualitative characteristics, the crisis went beyond purely economic and social parameters and acquired a geopolitical projection.

If we consider the crisis from a formal point of view, as an element of the “growth-decline-growth” cycle, then we can talk about the attenuation of its descending phase. Despite, however, the passage of the most acute stage and some scattered signs of improvement, the state of the world economy and the immediate prospects for its development are still problematic. The rise in production that resumed in 2010 did not transform into a process of sustainable and dynamic growth. In the main centers of the world economy, the situation of instability and low business activity. There is an aggravation of social and internal political problems.

The alarming warnings that periodically appear in the world press about the possibility of a second wave of the crisis are not without foundation. The emergence of the largest economies from recession was largely due to unprecedented money issue. In the USA, for example, the total volume of the first and second waves of so-called quantitative easing amounted to 2.3 trillion dollars. In September 2012, the Federal Reserve System (Fed) announced a new round of liquidity injections into the economy, as part of which This provides for monthly purchases by the Fed of Treasury bonds and mortgage obligations worth $40 billion. In the EU, during two long-term refinancing operations, the European Central Bank issued 1 trillion euro loans 2 .

However, the reasons for the systemic failure in the functioning of institutions and markets were still not eliminated. The policy of stimulating business activity through budgetary resources has led to an increase in government obligations. In the United States, in particular, public debt reached 106.6 percent of GDP in 2012 and continues to grow at an accelerated pace. Indicators close to this level were registered in the country only in 1947 (110 percent) due to high costs during the Second World War. The problem of budget deficit is acute. The main risks are related to the threat of the “fiscal cliff”, the achievement of the debt ceiling and the volatility of financial markets.

Negative trends persist in other leading countries industrial world. Japan, whose economy has been stagnating for a long time, finds itself faced with a high budget deficit and a record level of debt (235.8 percent of GDP) 3 . Particularly serious difficulties are experienced by the countries of the eurozone, where the epicenter of the crisis has moved. Countries such as Greece, Portugal, and Italy are in the high-risk zone. The volume of public debt of these countries in relation to GDP in 2011 amounted to 160.8, 106.8 and 120.1 percent, respectively. For comparison: the criteria for economic stability established by the Maastricht Treaty for member countries of the eurozone prescribe keeping public debt within 60 percent of GDP. Events in Spain are developing according to a negative scenario, essentially teetering on the brink of default.

The European Union has made significant efforts to prevent a catastrophic failure in the economy and the collapse of the eurozone. So far, however, there has been no radical change in the situation for the better. According to OECD data, in 2012 the economy of the 17 eurozone countries will shrink by 0.1 percent, and in 2013, GDP growth will be only 0.9 percent 4 . Against the backdrop of an uncertain recovery in production, bordering on entering a recession, the employment problem remains acute. The unemployment rate in the eurozone at the end of 2012 is projected to be 10.8 percent (10.0 percent in 2011). The most alarming figures remain in Spain (25.1 percent) and Greece (23.1 percent). These two countries also had the highest unemployment rates among youth (15 to 24 years old)—52.9 and 53.2 percent, respectively 5 .

The persistence of inertial trends in the centers of capitalism is also evidenced by the renewed increase in the volume of derivative instruments at the level of companies and banks, which played an extremely negative role in the development of the crisis. From 2010 to 2011, according to the Bank of International Settlements, the total volume of derivative contracts increased from 601 trillion to 648 trillion dollars 6 . For comparisons: cumulative world GDP is only 70 trillion, that is, about 10 percent of this position. The volume of derivatives on the balance sheets of American banks has increased, according to data Federal service according to US monetary control, from 165 trillion at the end of 2007 to 230.8 trillion at the end of 2011. Of these, 95 percent were accounted for by the five largest banks. This top five is headed by JP Morgan Chase ($88 trillion). It is followed by Bank of America (38 trillion), Citigroup (32 trillion), Gold-man Sachs (30 trillion) and Wells Fargo ($5 trillion) 7 / With such volumes of concentration of derivative financial instruments, even the most insignificant fluctuations in the markets can cause an “avalanche”, which can sweep away the protective mechanisms of the global monetary system that have been built in recent years.

Characterizing the current situation, the famous American researcher Kenneth Rogoff noted that “the mistakes that led to the 2008 crisis have not been corrected. The chances of an immediate recurrence of financial collapse are slightly reduced. The laws and regulations issued at the beginning of the crisis were largely a patchwork to maintain the status quo. However, in all other respects, essentially nothing has changed” 8.

Indeed, in general, we are still talking about the accumulated and unresolved issues in economically developed countries of growing sovereign debt, deepening budget deficits and global imbalances. Thus, having failed to fulfill its “cleansing mission,” the crisis took on a focal character, while the threat of local (country or regional) problems escalating into a new recession and its spread to other countries and segments of the global economy persisted.

Origins and causes of the crisis

To date, I have not reached a consolidated opinion either about the nature of the latest crisis, or, as J. Stiglitz defined it, the “great recession” (by analogy with the Great Depression of the 1930s), or about what kind of crisis it should be. development policy in the post-crisis period. The range of opinions remains quite wide. The existing interpretations deserve the closest attention. But often they focus attention on one, albeit important, component of the problem, without reflecting the complex or multi-dimensional nature of the changes taking place in the world. One cannot but agree with the Russian researcher A. Fursov, according to whose remark “crisis phenomena are most often analyzed in isolation, as a result of which the essence of the whole disappears. If we talk about the whole, then the world is not just going through a crisis, but is at such a turning point, which has no analogues in history until now” 9 . The theory of cyclicity, which states that the spiral always returns to a new level, but with the same regularity, does not work in this case exists. It's about, essentially, not about the next cycle, but about the formation of qualitatively new trends in the development of the global economy.

Discussions continue in the global economic community regarding the causes and nature of the current shocks. Speaking, however, about the origins, one cannot fail to note the peculiarities of the development of the world economy in the pre-crisis period. In the last two or three decades of the past century, the processes of globalization of production, trade, and financial flows began to have a decisive influence on the mechanism of the economic cycle. The interdependence of national economies, the consequences of uneven development and the struggle for resources have become a source of increased volatility in world markets. Structural components generated by disproportions in the development of individual countries, spheres and branches of production began to occupy an increasing share of cyclicality. The crises became more and more profound and no longer fit within the boundaries of individual national economic complexes. This period, as noted by the famous researcher of global financial crises, Charles Kindleberger, “can be called unprecedented in terms of instability in prices for goods, currencies, real estate and securities, as well as based on the frequency and severity of financial shocks” 10 .

The multi-layered and complex nature of the problems that emerged in 2008-2009 was also reflected in the interpretation of the origins of the crisis. Opinions vary - from explaining its reasons to “the lack of effective market regulation and supervision financial institutions» 11 before bringing to the fore the issue of the exhaustion of the global economic model that has developed over the past decades.

The most common opinion is that the crisis is purely financial in nature. And among the reasons are the liberalization of the credit and financial sphere, deregulation of international capital flows, underestimation of risks and excessive reliance of banking institutions on borrowed funds in the years preceding the crisis. That is, the crisis is interpreted as a purely financial one that arose in the market mortgage lending USA and spread along the chain to other segments of the financial system and to the real economy.

A special commission of the American Congress created by decision of President Barack Obama to investigate the causes of the 2008-2009 crisis came to an almost similar conclusion. The final report was made public in January 2011 12 . The crisis, according to the conclusion of the report’s authors, was provoked by the following factors: failures in financial regulation, violations in the field corporate governance, which led to excessive risks; excessively high household debt; widespread use of “exotic” securities (derivatives), growth of unregulated “shadow” banking system.

The blame was thus placed on bankers, financial regulators and politicians. Banks took on too much risk while regulators did not took proper measures to avoid this. Charges have also been brought against former head Fed Alan Greenspan for “failing to stop the rise of toxic mortgages and for promoting the idea that financial institutions could regulate themselves.” 13 .

In general, among supporters of the purely financial nature of the crisis, three main points of view can be distinguished. The first cause of the crisis is the uncontrolled use by the United States of its status as a reserve currency issuer. According to the second premise, the credit traps of the “consumer society” lie in the credit traps. Proponents of the third point of view focus on the uncontrolled development of financial markets.

This interpretation, in a generalized version, reflects the shifts that took place in the economy of industrial centers. Important qualitative changes have taken place here over the past decades. They are associated with the movement of production of standard and mass industrial, including engineering, products to rapidly developing countries - Mexico, China, India, Brazil, etc. The structure of production in the leading economies of the world has increasingly shifted towards the service sector. In the USA, for example, the share of material sectors in GDP decreased from 40 percent in the early 1950s to 20 percent in the early 2000s 14 .

The share of financial markets has increased significantly. Their growing influence was accompanied by a massive accumulation financial assets and the introduction of a number of institutional innovations that predetermined an increase in the levels of debt of households, corporate and public sectors. The virtual economy has become more attractive for investment compared to real production assets. In the United States, the share of the financial sector in total corporate profits increased from 7.5 percent in 1983 to 40 percent in 2007 15 .

Global financial transactions with money issues, exchange rates and credit transactions have become several times larger than the size of the real economy. The problem was aggravated by the massive launch into circulation through a multi-stage chain of derivatives - according to UNCTAD experts, “very dubious instruments in terms of their contribution to the growth of social welfare” 16 . Securitization and other similar innovations have disrupted the traditional relationship between lenders and borrowers. The financial component has acquired a self-sufficient significance and has actually lost touch with the real economy.

Taking these factors into account, the loss or even weakening of control over processes in financial sector could not but lead to another collapse on stock and credit markets. According to Alan Greenspan, in these conditions, “if securitized American subprime loans had not turned out to be a weak link in the global financial system, then some kind of role would have played its role.” some other financial product or market" 17 .

However, while highlighting the factor of “ineffective control” when explaining the reasons for the emerging turbulence, we lose sight of the fact that the financial component is only one of the systemic elements of the global economy, which started back in the 1990s. Its main components were deregulation and liberalization. It was the latter that were considered as the main regulator economic life in all its manifestations. In this context, the decrease in the level of control over the functioning of the financial market was, in essence, only a reflection or consequence of flaws in the model of the global economy and its leading segments represented by the USA, Western Europe and Japan, which largely determined the main contours , ideological and geopolitical parameters of world development.

It seems no coincidence that as the recession deepened, a broader interpretation of the anomalies that arose in the world economy emerged. Today, many authoritative representatives of political, economic and scientific circles agree that there are a number of reasons and factors for the emergence of such large-scale distortions in the global economy. As the American researchers K. Rogoff and K. Reinhart, already mentioned above, note, “serious financial crises rarely occur in isolation from other events. They are rather “not the triggers of the decline,” but more often the mechanisms of its intensification” 18.

The forms of manifestation of the latest crisis, its duration and the associated “shifts of tectonic platforms in the global economy,” as Christine Logard puts it, 19 give reason to believe that its origins are not primarily financial in nature. They are not, contrary to the opinion of the IMF and the World Bank (WB), only a consequence of the lack of effective market regulation and supervision of credit institutions 20 . Global disproportions did not arise in recent years. They are associated with the prevailing trends in the evolution of the world economy and the results of its development over the past decades. The statement of experts from such an authoritative organization in international economic circles as the UN Economic Commission for Countries is not without interest. Latin America and the Caribbean. In their opinion, “the crisis is not only an expression of the weakness of financial regulation, nor the result of a moral crisis caused by greed and greed. The crisis reflected the end of the development model and opens the door to discussions about further paths of socio-economic progress” 21.

The reasons for the turbulent processes that have arisen in the world economy are multifaceted and indicate a crisis in the global system as a whole. There is a comprehensive devaluation of the structure of global governance and the fundamental ideas of the modern world order. Combined with the transition to In the new phase of the technological cycle, this predetermined the scale of financial and economic failures. In addition, the preservation of the current model, which started back in the 1990s, has become the reason for the extremely unstable state of the economy in the main industrial centers in the post-crisis period.

Systemic aspects of the crisis

In terms of the totality of the main qualitative and quantitative characteristics, and above all in terms of its consequences, the crisis quickly transformed into a systemic one. He brought to life or strengthened tendencies and processes that were in a latent or inhibited state. Under his influence, they acquired a clearer and more structured expression and began to have an increasingly significant influence on the formation of the world development paradigm in its economic, ideological and geopolitical content. We can highlight a number of key, in our opinion, systemic aspects of the latest crisis.

Formation of a new configuration of centers of economic growth. The topic of shifting the economic balance of power in the world began to occupy one of the central places in the ongoing discussions about the development of the global economy in the post-crisis period. Despite the differences in quantitative assessments of the emerging trends, many researchers adhere to the point of view about the emergence of new centers of economic growth and influence. These changes became one of key factors modern geo-economic process. And we are not just talking about China and India. Changes are occurring almost throughout the entire perimeter of developing countries. The share of the latter in global GDP (at purchasing power parity) increased from 33.7 percent in 1980 to 43.4 percent in 2010. According to World Bank estimates, the advancing trend will continue in the next five or more years 22 . The share of developing countries in world exports increased from 22 percent in 1980 to 45 percent in 2010, and in the inflow of foreign direct investment (FDI), respectively, from 7 to 47 percent 23 .

Taking into account the currently prevailing trends, we can assume that the shift in growth centers is not opportunistic, but long-term in nature. According to the results of many forecasts, already in the next twenty years the balance of forces in the world economy may radically change in favor of developing countries. According to the UK branch of Pricewaterhouse Coopers (PwC), by 2020 the combined GDP of the seven largest emerging markets (Brazil, India, Indonesia, China, Mexico, Russia, Turkey) will exceed the GDP of the seven main industrial countries(USA, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Canada). If in 2000 the total GDP (PPP) of the seven industrial countries was more than twice the size of the seven developing economies, then by 2007 the gap had narrowed to 60 percent, and at the end of 2010 - to 35 percent. If current trends continue, by 2020 the gap will be reduced to zero. And by 2030, the developing seven will overtake the seven currently leading industrial states by 35 percent.

Really, international connections are currently working already not only in the North-South direction, but also South-North. The locomotive of recovery from the recession was not economically developed, but developing countries, among which Brazil, India, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and South Korea stood out (they account for approximately 55 percent GDP of countries emerging market) 24 . According to World Bank forecasts, from 2011 to 2025, developing economies will have an annual growth rate of 4.7 percent, and developed economies - only 2.325 percent 25 . Until 2025, the driving force will be the growing power and influence of upstream markets.

Taking into account current trends, the forecast estimates noted above do not look unrealistic. However, as empirical data indicate, economic development is not always linear, and the actual dynamics of GDP can differ significantly from forecast indicators. Thus, until 1990, the issue of Japan becoming the leading economy in the world was actively discussed. But this did not happen, although the forecasts looked quite reasonable. In addition, one cannot ignore the fact that the growth of China and a number of other developing countries is to a certain extent influenced by the low base effect. The extensive model of their development also has an effect. There is still a high reserve of low-skilled labor here, which is actively involved in the production process. At the same time, the gap in per capita income, in the scale of poverty and poverty, in labor productivity levels and other socio-economic parameters remains quite significant. However, the current prevailing trends indicate the presence of serious shifts in the global geopolitical space.

Erosion of a unipolar world. Currently, the growing economic power of China, favorable forecasts for the economic growth of India and a number of other fast-growing economies allow us to say that the world is in the stage of formation of multipolarity and a gradual redivision of the sphere of political And economic influence. An increasing number of countries and regions are no longer mere objects of geopolitical processes; their desire to pursue their own policies, often contradicting the strategies of the great powers, is growing. A qualitative difference in the current situation is that the number of leading players in world politics has increased due to new powers, regional groupings, and international organizations that have a significant influence on world events.

The USA still remains the leading and most powerful power in the world, but the main feature of the modern The new geopolitical process is the entry of China and India into the major league of global politics. A number of countries - Brazil, Turkey, Indonesia, South Korea - also increased their status. Countries such as Argentina, Mexico, and South Africa are increasingly asserting themselves as important subjects of the world economy. In particular, the process of economic, social and political renewal of Brazil has noticeably accelerated. At the end of 2010, in terms of GDP ($2.17 trillion in PPP), it was ahead of Italy and came close to Great Britain (2.23) and France (2.19) 26 . Brazil is increasingly positioning itself as a heavyweight in global economics and politics.

Against this background, there is a process of decline in the share of the United States in the world economy. In terms of a number of quantitative parameters, China is already closer to the United States - like no other American competitor in the entire 20th century. In 2008, the size of the Chinese economy (based on PPP) was 42.8 percent of the American one, and in 2010 - 69.2 percent 27 . If China's economic growth rates continue, then by 2020 the economies will be equal (according to GDP volume), and by 2030 China will be ahead by about 20 percent. Such a scenario is very likely and is widely accepted. The share of other rising countries is also growing. So, India's GDP (PPP) in 2001year was at the level of 51 percent of Japan's GDP, and in 2010 - 97 percent 28 .

The balance of power in the global economy is beginning to change, and this process will apparently continue. Before the crisis, the role of the United States as a center for coordinating global macroeconomic policy was hardly subject to serious criticism.

However, the recession that began in December 2007 and the ongoing instability in the country have weakened the American economy and called into question the ability of the United States to continue to play the role of financial and economic leader. The United States is gradually ceasing to be the driving force of the world economy.

Notably, in 2008, the US National Intelligence Council for the first time acknowledged that America's global power was indeed on a downward trajectory. In one of its periodic futuristic reports, Global Trends 2025, the council cited “the transfer of global wealth and economic power from West to East, unprecedented in world history,” as a major factor in the decline of “the comparative power of the United States.” - even in the military sphere." According to the council, “in terms of the size, speed and direction of the flow, the current transfer of wealth and economic influence from the West to the East has no precedent in modern history» 29.

In a situation of weakening of the prevailing positions of the West, the process of formation of new economic and political structures intensified - BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Union of South American Nations (Unasur), etc. - with their desire to reach a global level of development and decision making. As the practice of recent years has shown, today it is virtually impossible to resolve global issues unilaterally. New collective forums turned out to be in demand. One of them was the G20, which emerged in extreme crisis conditions. Concerns that the global economy is at brink of disaster, accelerated the transition from the G7 to the G20 format, which includes the world's largest economies and the most important emerging national markets.

This expansion of economic coordination represents the recognition of a new group of global economic players. The creation of the G20 was an indirect confirmation that Western countries are not able to cope with global economic problems alone. Essentially, this became a reflection of the tendency towards a rebalancing of forces in the world and its movement towards multipolarity.

Crisis of ideological concepts. One of the main consequences of the crisis was growing doubt, not only in expert circles, but also in government circles, about the effectiveness of economic liberalism. In a number of cases, the question is raised about replacing the ideological concepts of the 20th century and the previously dominant orthodox theories and points of view regarding the implementation of macroeconomic policy 30 . The global economic crisis has undermined faith in the infallibility of markets.

We can talk about the weakening of the positions of supporters of the idea of ​​​​the superiority of liberal capitalism and limiting the role of the state. The crisis has revealed systemic shortcomings inherent in the functioning of unregulated global markets. Thus, facing the threat of depression, Washington and others economically developed countries went to nationalize failed systemically important financial companies and banks, to inject hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy. The concept of monetarism, which is based on the position that a priori markets are competitive and market system able to automatically achieve macroeconomic equilibrium. At the height of the crisis, almost all leading industrialized countries were forced to switch to “manual” control. Without significant government injections of funds into the economy and to support bankrupt financial institutions, most countries would be doomed to financial collapse.

Under the influence of the crisis, the pendulum shifted from monetarism to the Keynesian concept regarding the role of the state in the formation and implementation of economic policy. According to P. Krugman, “the ideas of John Maynard Keynes, who analyzed the essence of the Great Depression, are now more significant than ever” 31 . In professional and public discussions, arguments in favor of recognizing specific functions of the state, requiring not only establishing the rules of the game in the market and monitoring their compliance, but also direct work on the economic field, began to sound more and more convincingly. More precisely, in those areas that private capital avoids due to their low profitability, high risks and long payback periods.

Exacerbation of structural problems of the global financial system. Under the influence of the crisis, the issue of reforming the global financial architecture has reached a new level. The problem of the weakening position of the American dollar has become most acute. Slow and unsustainable recovery of the US economy, persistent fiscal The cash deficit and growing government debt predetermined the growing distrust in the ability of the dollar to perform the functions of the world reserve currency. It should be noted that the idea of ​​​​introducing a global means of payment not related to the national monetary unit any country has been discussed for decades. At one time, J.M. Keynes, at the Bretton Woods Conference (1944), defended the idea of ​​a world central bank with its own currency (bancor).

Under the influence of the crisis, the idea of ​​​​improving the currently existing monetary system acquired concrete outlines in the form of put forward proposals. If until recently this issue was mainly of an academic nature, today the corresponding conclusions and recommendations are being formulated within the framework of international organizations. The UNCTAD report for 2009 concluded that “the current monetary system in the world is ineffective, slows down the development of the world economy and is one of the main causes of the financial and economic crisis” 32 . This white paper from the multinational institution also emphasizes that the dollar's role as the world's reserve currency must be reconsidered. According to the organization's specialists, the new currency system should not be based on one or even several national currencies. As an alternative to the dollar, it is proposed to use special drawing rights (SDRs) issued by the IMF (created in 1969).

The UN expert commission on reform of the international monetary and financial system under the leadership of J. Stiglitz came to a similar conclusion. The Commission spoke in favor of the adoption of a truly global reserve currency, “the credibility of which and its stability will not depend on the unpredictability of the economy and politics of a single country” 33 . These proposals were further developed in the ECOSOC report. According to UN experts, since the US dollar is not a stable store of value, one of the requirements for a reserve currency is “it is necessary to develop a new system, which should be based on the issuance of international liquidity, and not on the use of national -cash currencies" 34.

Critical statements regarding the existing monetary system, as well as proposals put forward to reduce the international status of the dollar, have very real grounds, related, in particular, to the complexity of the financial and economic problems facing the United States. The dollar is not as strong as it used to be. However, the question is far from so clear-cut. Calls to find a replacement American currency seem difficult to achieve, especially in the near future. University of California professor Benjamin Cohen explains, in particular, the current situation by the current lack of a real alternative to the dollar. To paraphrase famous saying W. Churchill on democracy, B. Cohen noted that “the dollar may turn out to be the worst solution, apart from all the others” 35.

At the same time, declarations about changes in the status of the dollar are beginning to be supplemented by specific practical steps aimed at at least partially neutralizing the uncontrolled behavior of the dollar on world currency markets. The desire to reduce dependence on the euro and dollar was truly embodied at the BRICS summit in Delhi (March 28-29, 2012). Two important documents were signed there: a general agreement on the provision of loans in national currencies and a multilateral agreement on the confirmation of letters of credit within the framework of the BRICS interbank cooperation mechanism (an obligation to prioritize transactions of banks in these countries). This is the first step towards the transition to national currencies in mutual settlements. The agreement provides for the creation of basic mechanisms for making payments and financing projects in national currencies between authorized banks of BRICS members.

In addition, the BRICS participants expressed their readiness to consider the proposal put forward by India to create a South-South Development Bank to finance infrastructure and innovation projects in developing countries. Announcing the possibility of creating a supranational development institute and mechanism mutual lending, the leaders of the BRICS countries thereby expressed their readiness to build their own structure capable of accumulating investment resources and directing them to those projects that are primarily beneficial to the bloc itself.

Under the influence of the crisis, the problem of de-dollarization has become quite urgent. The need for the formation of a world currency unit is objective. The very logic of globalization of economic activity does not correspond to the functioning of national currencies in the role of world money and ultimately undermines the foundations of such functioning. However, the ongoing debate over alternatives to the US dollar, including increasing the role of the SDR, has not yet led to any significant results. The process of promoting other alternative currencies will likely take a relatively long period of time. Given the significant divergence of interests of individual states (as well as large differences between the views of economic theorists), achieving the goals of forming an international monetary system, which would be based on the use of a universal supranational monetary unit, is apparently a strategic target setting for a long-term historical perspective. The most likely scenario seems to be a gradual decline in the role of the dollar in world reserves and external payments as the share of the United States in the world economy decreases. According to World Bank forecasts, the dollar will cease to be the main world currency by 2025. The WB report “Global Development Horizons 2011” notes that during this period a new multicurrency system may emerge: the American dollar will lose its dominance, the euro and the yuan will equal it in status 36 . This scenario is supported by the likelihood that the United States, the eurozone countries and China will by that time become the three main poles of economic growth.

Under the influence of the crisis, the emphasis is also changing in the policies of international financial institutions, which are trying to adapt their activities to new imperatives.

In particular, if in the recent past capital control measures introduced by some countries met with a severe negative reaction from the IMF, the crisis forced this established point of view to be adjusted. There is a growing understanding that open market capital combined with an unregulated financial sector is a ticking time bomb. The collective paper “Capital Inflows: The Role of Control,” published in 2010 by a team of IMF staff, recognizes the use of restrictive practices in relation to uncontrolled flows of foreign capital as a legitimate anti-crisis policy tool that can strengthen the economy. stability of developing countries. Among the logical measures, the authors of the report name taxes on financial transactions and on short-term external loans, reserving interest on loans in foreign currency, and requirements for the minimum permissible period of investment 37 .

This opinion was recognized as the official point of view of the foundation (with certain reservations). The report of the IMF Board of Directors (December 2012) enshrines the fund’s new vision regarding the regulation of cross-border capital flows: “Full liberalization of financial flows cannot be considered a universal goal for all countries at all times. Temporary restrictions can be justified and useful during economic shocks, as well as when other means of monetary policy have been exhausted.” According to the document, “under certain conditions, measures designed to limit capital flows may be useful and appropriate” 38 .

The IMF's new approach is, in essence, a recognition of changing realities, including the increasing weight of countries with emerging markets that are most vulnerable to speculative capital flows. The stated principles directly contradict the key postulates of the “Washington Consensus”, which until recently dominated the global financial sphere.

Towards a “retooling of world development”

Thus, speaking about the nature and features of the crisis, we can highlight the following. Firstly, the events of 2008-2009 essentially indicate a crisis in the global economic model represented by the current industrial centers. We are talking primarily about the United States, which until recently acted as the standard of the market economy, the leader of technological achievements and innovations, and, no less important, the source of ideas and concepts about the ways and forms of development of the world economy and the world order as a whole. This does not yet mean a radical undermining of the US's dominant position. Nevertheless, it is evidence of the weakening of the Western-centric world and the emergence of new global players on the world stage and the development of the post-American world. According to, for example, the famous American scientist, author of the book “The End of History and the Last Man” F. Fukuyama and President of the Center for Global Development N. Birdsall, “the American version of capitalism, if it has not lost its reputation, then at least it is no longer dominant. The West, and especially the United States, will no longer be viewed as the only center of innovative socio-political thought. And when it comes to international organizations, the voices and ideas of the United States and Europe are increasingly less dominant.” 39 .

Secondly, the causes of the global recession are not limited to the economy alone. The crisis is not ultimately purely economic. He has more common ground— degradation of the old and the formation of a new system of world order, which is accompanied by an exacerbation of anomalous phenomena in the real and financial sectors of the economy. This was expressed in a deep and multifaceted structural crisis, which affected not only the economy, but also political, ideological and other supporting structures modern world.

Thirdly, the relevance of the issue of reaching a new level of interaction within the global economy has increased. The imperatives of sustainable development predetermine the need to create conditions and prerequisites for the formation of mutually beneficial and systemic connections between all groups of countries and regions. The crisis has particularly highlighted the growing importance of emerging markets. In this context, taking into account their interests and special needs, as noted by former World Bank President R. Zoellick, “is no longer charity or solidarity, but a matter of the self-interest of industrial states” 40 .

Discussions about the prospects and principles of building a global economy, taking into account the multipolar reality, remain relevant to this day, and the process of rapprochement of positions is still far from being completed. Despite, however, the differences in approaches, the general idea of ​​the need to reach new principles of the world order that most adequately meet modern realities prevails. According to F. Fukuyama, under the influence of the crisis, “not only the largest Wall Street companies collapsed, but a certain set of ideas about capitalism collapsed” 41 .

In the context of ongoing uncertainty and the clash of opposing trends, reaching a new equilibrium state will require more than just adjustments to national development strategies. The agenda includes issues of a fundamental nature - the development of new approaches to the formation of institutions and mechanisms at the global level that are adequate to the needs of sustainable socio-economic progress, taking into account such problems as environmental conservation, energy security, overcoming social inequality, and other pressing issues of our time. UN experts define this process as a “retooling” of global development, that is, “implementing a fundamental reform of global economic management mechanisms and developing a new paradigm for sustainable growth” 42 .

There are different ideas about the role of the state in the conditions of market economic development. There is a point of view about the minimum possible government intervention in economic processes. Market mechanisms regulate all trends in economic development. This is seen as a positive role for the market, and it is believed that the state’s intervention can only disrupt its regulatory processes.

But there is another point of view. The state cannot be in absolute isolation from the economy, being objectively one of the elements of the country’s economic system. And the question lies not so much in the problem of intervention, but in the nature and form of state participation in economic life, in the functions of the state that promote sustainable and anti-crisis development of the economy. At the same time, the participation of the state is determined by the specific reality of economic development processes, the size, scale, features, and state of the economy.

The participation of the state in the economic life of the country is manifested mainly in its regulatory function, which characterizes one of the main functions of management. But regulation is not management in full of all its functions; it is ensuring and maintaining certain conditions for economic development, which are carried out taking into account market mechanisms, but do not deny their actions. On the contrary, the regulatory role of the state can be expressed in supporting the operation of market mechanisms.

Based on this, it can be stated that there is an objective possibility and need for state regulation of the processes of anti-crisis economic development.

The possibility is expressed in the fact that the organs government controlled through their legislative activities they create the legal framework for the functioning of the economy. In addition, the state has large economic resources, which, if necessary, can be used to support the banking system or individual economic entities.

The need for government regulation is manifested in the need to preserve the potential for economic development in conditions of worsening crisis situations. The state must prevent the destruction of the economic system. This is its purpose and role.

The regulatory activity of the state has certain boundaries and is manifested in the following factors

• 1. Motivating the development of innovative transformation programs aimed at positive changes economic development trends. These may be transformations in the field of personnel management, forms of organization and competition conditions, in the assessment of the most important lifestyle factors, in the field of material consumption. Such transformations cannot but have an impact on the organization of production and its financial activities, on the connection between industry and banks, on the relationship between money, credit and savings. This is far from full list problems contained in the regulatory activities of the state to motivate the development of innovations.
• 2. Determining the conditions for the use and dissemination of innovations. After all, innovations can be not only useful, but also useless, as well as premature, when the conditions for them at the micro- or macro-level are not yet ripe, when organizations are not yet ready to perceive them. Therefore, the question of the factors that, in the face of a crisis, determine the perception and diffusion of innovations is very important.
• 3. Determining the differences between local and global innovative transformations. A distinction must be made between incremental innovations within an existing innovation system and changes that drive its transformation. The new can be superimposed on the old, a transition can be made from one method of regulation to another in the process of changing generations, and this applies not only to personnel management, but also to the use of buildings, structures, and equipment.
• 4. Establishing system compatibility of simultaneously occurring transformations. After all, the ongoing transformations may either not lead to the goal or cause unpredictable consequences. Therefore, in anti-crisis management it is necessary to assess how sustainable and effective the transformations will be in relation to the goals of socio-economic development, how situations of disequilibrium in microeconomics are resolved, what determines the combination of partial compromises or new institutions, how they affect the regulatory system as a whole, whether they are compatible with each other mechanisms for the distribution of capital, labor, money, loans.
• 5. The state is also carrying out organizational and structural changes, which are manifested in strengthening the administrative mechanism of anti-crisis management. Direct contact between the population and the state occurs when government services are provided to the population. For most citizens, this is the only opportunity for direct contact with the state. The population judges the effectiveness of crisis management by the extent to which its consequences are reflected in their daily lives.

When carrying out socio-economic transformations, there is often a desire to transfer to the country the principles of economic development that are widespread within completely different geographical and historical boundaries. Whereas there are well-known examples of the practice of socio-economic development, indicating that the systems of economic functioning differ in time and space. An example would be various options economic development in Germany, USA, Sweden, France, Japan.

A market economy is not an end in itself, but a means of economic development. Therefore, the state’s efforts should focus on finding ways to maximize the use of existing scientific, technical and production potential, preserve and develop human capital, and ensure broad social support for all socio-economic transformations.

In accordance with this, the state must pursue an active policy of industrial and social development countries. Particular attention should be paid to the problem of forming the composition of the necessary institutions, without which a market economy cannot function normally. Compliance with this provision is very important for Russia. The market is viewed as a self-regulating economic system. But this does not mean that market mechanisms are absolutely independent of the state, which must determine the conditions for their effectiveness and help cleanse them from corruption and mafia formations.

It is very interesting and significant that in many capitalist countries the main factors that made it possible to establish mass production and consumption after the Second World War are now working in the opposite direction - exacerbating the structural crisis. This is especially noticeable in many European countries.

Unraveling the mechanism for realizing development and subsequent decline is one of the most pressing tasks today. The works of many prominent scientists of the world are dedicated to it. And for Russia, understanding this phenomenon, like the whole modern theory regulation of economic development is of enduring importance.

The main problem is the interaction between government and the market. This is not a question of whether or not the state should interfere in economic affairs. World experience confirms that the market of competing sellers is still the best way effective organization production and distribution of goods and services. However, the market cannot develop in a vacuum; it needs a legal and regulatory framework.

It is the state that forms such a basis for development, protecting and protecting property rights, creating legal and other regulatory systems, promoting effective business activities of citizens and preserving the environment. The market is diverse in its typological characteristics and forms. The state takes this into account, using various approaches and methods for regulation.

The activities of the state do not necessarily have to be expressed only in the form of regulation of private activity, or take the form of financial support or transfers of goods and services. Other manifestations of his activity are possible.

The relationship between the state and the market is manifested in four aspects: human development, internal economy, international economics and macro economic policy. These areas of activity are closely interconnected. If the domestic economy is not excessively distorted, it contributes to the formation of human capital. At the same time, education makes the domestic economy more productive by providing trained professionals with increased ability to master new technologies in production.

A stable macroeconomy influences the price system and reduces the painful manifestation of inflation. The effectiveness of microeconomics determines the ability to maintain inflation at a low level. Businesses have less need for subsidies, which exacerbate public sector deficits.

The relationships between these aspects must be sufficiently reliable and consistent. This is one of the most important problems of state regulation of market relations in the economy.

In the processes of economic development, fundamental changes must occur both in the responsibilities of the state and in the responsibilities of both the enterprise and the citizen. In market conditions, enterprises and organizations themselves ensure the efficiency and profitability of production. People are responsible for finding work and realizing their potential. The state is called upon to monitor the relationship between the scale and speed of transformations and the emergence of dangerous trends that threaten the social stability and security of the country.

When a crisis occurs, the ways out of it, and then the paths of economic growth, are determined not by the strength and sovereignty of the state, but by its ability to encourage transformations that meet changing needs and conditions. A crisis always leads to a revision of outdated ideas. It is important to discern in it the sprouts of the new, around which changes in the economic and social space should take place.

This function of the state reflects the democratic foundations of the authorities, interested in the socially oriented nature of transformations and capable of implementing policies in the interests of society as a whole, and not of any groups, clans and elites. Power should be a kind of effective mechanism for the development of the economy and society, ensuring the activities of administrations in accordance with the will of voters, protecting society from the monopolization of power. This status of power largely depends on the presence of state and public control over the actions of power.

To implement such control, a number of conditions must be met. First of all, this is the development of the legislative framework and effective mechanisms for the implementation of all laws by everyone. In a society in which a state-legal system has not been created that guarantees the prevention of destructive conflicts by force of law, the shadow economy is growing. People employed in it, as is known, do not report their economic turnover to statistical authorities. Therefore, a direct, statistically complete and reliable assessment of the scale shadow economy impossible. This is reflected in the efficiency of economic management.

An important condition for state regulation of economic development is the formation of mechanisms that ensure the resolution of social contradictions, maintenance of economic security, political stability and orientation towards the legal protection of the individual, and the socialization of economic activity.

The strategy for any transformation must include a preliminary assessment social consequences decisions made, their adjustment and a system of measures to mitigate and compensate for negative consequences. All this necessitates a new approach to managing socio-economic processes, which takes into account the uncertainty of the results of business decisions, as well as risk factors.

The use of the concept of risk in the regulatory activities of the state involves anticipating possible critical situations, assessing probable losses for the population, identifying their qualitative and quantitative nature, depending on the scale and reality of their compensation.

The state itself is interested in the development and implementation of such a concept. At his disposal are huge highly liquid money. As an owner, the state should be extremely interested in the expanded reproduction of its industrial and financial capital. Increased profitability state property directly depends on the management of this property.

The state implements its management functions in several areas.

Firstly, these are enterprises of federal subordination.

According to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), federal property is transferred to enterprises with the right of economic management, and to institutions with the right of operational management. This is necessary to control the use of state property, assess the efficiency of the functioning of enterprises, and in relation to institutions - to assess the purpose of their activities.

The state monitors the financial condition and determines the prospects for the development of enterprises and organizations, ways and forms of restructuring production, if necessary, its diversification, and determines strategic directions of development.

Secondly, these are enterprises with state share participation in the authorized capital. These enterprises are also subject to government influence. It is carried out by including state representatives in the management bodies of these enterprises. It should be noted that officials do not always defend the interests of the state in them, although they receive wages from it. Therefore, in the conditions of a gap between the incomes of government representatives and enterprise managers, it is possible that civil servants will become financially dependent on managers and vote on general meeting shareholders and the board of directors in their interests.

Thirdly, the state has real estate. This is a gold fund of state property, which is always valuable and must constantly function effectively. One of the directions in this area of ​​government activity is the sale of real estate to replenish the state budget.

Fourthly, closely related to the activities of the state land relations. The question of land is a question not only of ensuring stable income to the state budget, but also of preserving Russia as a stable independent geopolitical unit. Its solution largely depends on whether the country's citizens will realize their involvement in a single social whole, not only in the state-political aspect, but, more importantly, as a single territorial, economic, cultural-historical and spiritual-value space. To effectively participate in economic life, society must be the owner of those resources on which the livelihoods of all its members are based - land, water and other natural resources, including minerals, airspace and landscape and recreational zones.

Finally, the field of state regulation includes property relations in regions where the interests of the employee, enterprise and state are realized. In practice, federal enterprises are often transferred into the ownership of constituent entities of the Russian Federation to repay the state’s debt to their budgets. After all, an enterprise is property that has a certain value. However, it should be understood that the enterprise is the main structure-forming element of the economy. In the process of its functioning, labor, material and financial resources are combined, it is a source of satisfying society's needs for goods and services and a place for applying the labor and efforts of the majority of the country's working population. This circumstance plays a decisive role in state regulation of socio-economic development.

All acts of state regulation of economic development contain two questions: why does the state do this and how does it do it?

The problems of the first question have already been discussed above. The answer to the second question is usually associated with regulatory and legislative activities, financial regulation, activities in the field of production and income redistribution.

The regulatory and legislative activities of the state are expressed mainly in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which is rightly called an “economic structure.” This figurative expression very accurately and succinctly characterizes the importance of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation for regulating the country's economy. Its norms in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 76 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation have direct effect throughout the entire territory of the Russian Federation.

Competition as a necessary element of a market economy presupposes not only a certain dynamism of economic development, but also the possibility of stagnation. Legal acts regulating restrictions on competition and usually called antitrust law, along with legal acts devoted to combating unfair competition, occupy a significant place in anti-crisis legislation.

Dynamically developing relationships between participants civil turnover inevitably push for improvement of domestic legislation. the federal law dated October 26, 2002 No. 127-FZ “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)” takes into account the accumulated negative experience of bankruptcy procedures and builds a system of “checks and balances” against the property claims of creditors, which includes:

• – a more complex procedure for initiating bankruptcy cases and establishing the amount of creditors’ claims in the arbitration court;
• – a procedure for selecting an arbitration manager, in which creditors do not choose a specific person, but only determine professional requirements, which should facilitate the appointment of a manager who is initially independent of the creditors;
• – clear regulation of actions with the debtor’s property;
• – vesting the owner-debtor with rights that enable him to actively participate in bankruptcy procedures and, if necessary, protect his legitimate interests.

This Law sets out in sufficient detail the procedure for the owner or founder to satisfy all claims of creditors recorded in the register, or to provide the debtor with funds in the required amount. It is important that, in accordance with the Law, the role of the owner in bankruptcy procedures changes: instead of a passive observer, he becomes an active participant in the procedure, playing the role of an effective counterbalance in the event of unfounded claims of creditors to the debtor’s property.

At the same time, the Law does not solve all the problems associated with the activities of enterprises, since almost each of them is a complex socio-economic and technical system that integrates a variety of resources and factors. The characteristics of an enterprise or organization are not limited to its representation either as a property complex or as legal entity, nor as a commodity producer or a social unit of society. Each of these views reflects only one aspect of the enterprise, but does not reflect it as a whole.

In this regard, the diverse activities of enterprises are currently regulated by many regulatory legal acts, such as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, Federal Law of December 26, 2005 No. 208-FZ "On Joint Stock Companies", Law of the Russian Federation of February 7, 1992 No. 2300-1 “On the Protection of Consumer Rights”, the already mentioned Federal Law “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)”, etc.

However, each of them is focused on one aspect of activity and does not fully take into account the others. At the same time, each of the regulations allows for a certain variability in the choice of management and organizational decisions, but the formally legal choice of combinations of these options sometimes creates opportunities for such unscrupulous actions as seizure of property through bankruptcy, deception of partners, violation of the rights of employees and shareholders. Under these conditions, not a single systemic problem problems of enterprises cannot be solved by making changes to each of the acts separately.

In times of crisis, public policy takes on special importance. regulatory regulation in the field of social values. The importance of the regulatory activities of the state stems from the objective need to maintain economic efficiency and justice in extreme situations, to provide consumers with the necessary and reliable information in connection with the occurrence of circumstances dangerous to the health and life of people. Therefore, the state is tightening the regime of control over compliance with regulations governing, for example, the production and sale of alcoholic beverages, food products, medicines, and complex electrical appliances.

The role of the state in regulating such aspects of social life as employment, labor relations, and household development is extremely important. It is carried out through a wide arsenal of legislative and administrative measures, price and tariff policies, taxes, social transfers, and environmental regulations.

An analysis of economic development trends over the past years shows that recovery from the crisis and its successful development are impossible without comprehensive humanization, i.e. a decisive turn to the needs and requirements of man, the development of his abilities and creative potential. The regulatory and legal activities of the state should maximally contribute to the combination of social incentives for the development of social production with its natural purpose - to serve the needs of people.

One of the types of state regulation of economic development is financial regulation, which covers several specialized areas:

– public finance is a specific area in which federal, regional and local authorities and their representatives, as well as public organizations, in the course of their activities, operate with large sums coming from various sources, distributing them in accordance with accepted budgeting procedures. These bodies have the right to issue certain securities, involving investors in socially significant programs.

At the same time, the goals of public organizations differ from the goals of private ones. commercial organizations. They are usually focused on solving specific socio-political problems rather than making a profit;

• – institutional finance plays a special role and deals with huge amounts of money, which is explained by the presence in the economy of any country of banks, exchanges, credit unions, insurance companies, pension funds and other types of financial institutions. They stimulate savings, accumulate money in funds sufficient for investment, lend, insure, guarantee, in a word, provide specific financial services;
• – International finance is the area of ​​finance that deals with problems that arise as soon as cash flows cross national borders: currency conversion, features of commercial and tax legislation, taxation of foreign citizens, balance foreign trade, differences in price structure, etc.;
• – analysis of financial instruments and investments - an area that deals with the development and improvement of methods of financial analysis necessary for assessing risk and profitability when investing in stocks, bonds and other securities, as well as when conducting certain financial transactions in conditions of incomplete or inaccurate information;
• – financial management– specific activities related to the study of financial problems, searching for sources of cheap funds and opportunities for profitable use of money, and managing financial flows.

In a generalized view, financial regulation is a function of managing the totality of funds at the disposal of a household, enterprise or state, as well as sources of income, items of expenditure, the procedure for their formation and use. Financial resources are accumulated in the country budget system, which ensures their redistribution in accordance with accepted criteria and conditions.

Fiscal policy must take into account a number of specific factors, and above all the danger of economic and financial crises. It cannot be carried out according to typical market economy scenarios, i.e. as a typical case characteristic of a developed market economy. Its tasks and goals reflect the characteristics of the current period of development, namely:

• the use of budget policy as a means of achieving common objectives and goals of economic transformation;
• ensuring controllability of economic processes and the economy as a whole during a crisis;
• resolution or mitigation of acute social contradictions that arise in crisis situations;
• development of new relations of fiscal federalism.

Budget policy to a certain extent implements and common goals, which face any budget system. This is the concentration and centralization of financial resources, the impact on economic growth and employment, and ensuring the economic and political functions of the state.

The depth and duration of the crisis in the country can be generated, firstly, by miscalculations in the choice of the system and mechanisms of overdue transformations; secondly, the lack of a clear target orientation and, thirdly, ignoring global experience in regulating the economy.

During budget execution, the programs that the government is obligated to finance are often subject to the most significant cuts. The consequence of this is a decrease in wages and delays in their payment, the decline of healthcare and education, and other vital sectors.

The state covers the budget deficit through transactions with securities and obtaining foreign loans. In the regions, the tension in the financial situation is reduced through the sale of real estate, unfinished construction projects, shareholdings, and long-term lease rights for land plots. But these resources are finite. We need renewable resources, i.e. income from production. This can be achieved in our conditions only by stimulating savings.

The situation with savings in our country is explained, firstly, by the lack of clear guidelines for investing funds and, secondly, by the poor performance of the economic development lending mechanism.

Swedish economist Knut Wicksell, studying the problems of economic growth, came to the conclusion that capital accumulation, or investment, is a function of the ratio of real and natural interest rates. The first is the actual rate of interest - a simple thing. This is, in fact, the price of money borrowed, or the interest rate for the loan. The natural rate of interest is a more complex matter. It refers to the “anticipated profit as a result of the use of a loan,” or, in other words, the expected rate of profit on newly created capital. This norm is never real; it is just the entrepreneur’s expectation to receive a certain stream of income in the future.

K. Wicksell expressed an idea that was later confirmed by numerous operations to regulate ups and downs in economic development by the interest rate of the central bank of any country - capital accumulation occurs at the moment when the natural rate of interest, i.e. expected performance real capital, higher than the loan fee. When the ratio changes in favor of the actual norm, the accumulation of real capital is suspended.

Economic growth is always associated with the accumulation of real capital. In order for capital to accumulate, there must be a verified relationship between the real and natural rates of interest. This is what needs to be managed, and this is also important because money in our market is quite expensive.

High cost of credit Russian market due to the lack of commercial banks with sufficient assets to conduct vigorous lending activities. This problem can be solved by strengthening the capital base of insurance and pension savings citizens and net capital - papers for ownership of land, subsoil, real estate, company shares, etc. But neither our citizens nor the state yet have capital sufficient to saturate these institutions. The ability of banks to accept papers confirming ownership of housing, land, and subsoil as collateral is also limited.

Therefore, one of the important tasks of the state is to help banks provide a wide range of high-quality services, everywhere and in affordable prices. In recent years domestic banks began to resemble standard financial intermediaries more than ever and were noticeably closer to the goal of forming a normal commercial business. However, they still face the challenge of achieving a sustainable development trajectory.

The optimal state for the banking system is when profits ensure a growth rate of capital no less than the growth rate of assets. In this case, banks are able to pay dividends to shareholders without risking long term prospects development. When banks turn into commercially effective enterprises, the prerequisites are created for a qualitative change in the nature of the relationship between banks and shareholders, including the formation of a market bank shares, reducing the dependence of banks on shareholders.

The mechanism for adjusting monetary processes is complex. Many parameters that determine the state of the monetary sphere, for example, the demand for money and the speed of its circulation, are beyond the control of state bodies. Therefore, the main emphasis in modern money management programs is on changing their supply, i.e. on the acceleration or deceleration of the rate of money emission. Control over emission processes is not direct, but indirect.

There are several ways out of a crisis situation. The first is to gradually restore lost savings. The second is to stimulate the attraction of new savings of citizens to banks and non-bank financial institutions. The third is the attraction of direct and portfolio foreign capital and external borrowing. The fourth is the use of the practice of accounting and rediscounting bills, widespread in the West.

These control methods have both advantages and disadvantages. The first method does not lead to inflation, but contributes to the growth of public debt. In addition, it practically does not increase financial capital, since the restoration of the population’s savings occurs mainly through borrowing money from them. The second method also does not threaten inflation, but extends the process of growth of financial capital over a long period of time. This gives rise to the problem of non-payments and a shortage of sources of financing investments in fixed and working capital. The third method can mitigate the problem, but it makes the financing of the economy dependent on world market conditions. The fourth method is practically not used in our country.

It is possible to get out of the financial crisis only by overcoming the growing loss of confidence of the majority of the population in the reforms being carried out in the country. The main thing is to avoid desocialization of financial policy. Only sustainable economic growth can quell the roots of tension and reduce the severity of the country's debt crisis.

The basis for economic growth is the opportunity to invest. But foreign capital does not go to Russia due to doubts about the availability of normal conditions for economic activity.

One of the ways to form financial reserves for economic growth is the development of energy saving. In our country, the energy intensity of the gross domestic product has recently been growing, and economic energy productivity has been falling, although the opposite should be the case. We spend one and a half times more fuel per unit of electricity produced than in Western countries. A modern Danish, German or English thermal power plant has an efficiency factor of more than 50%, while a Russian one has an efficiency of 36%.

Tax reforms are of great importance for the implementation of anti-crisis measures in the financial sector. The need to reduce the tax burden is dictated not only by considerations of stimulating economic growth, but also by the need to create a key characteristic of a market economy - equality of external conditions for all participants economic relations. Historically, large businesses, formed in the early 1990s. and received solid support in the form of public assets, from the very beginning made extensive use of its administrative and financial resources to minimize tax contributions. With the help of numerous offshore schemes, large businesses have the opportunity to legally withdraw significant amounts from taxation.

The development of the public debt market will make it possible to further finance cyclical budget deficits without significant losses in the form of a sharp increase in servicing costs. In addition, the development of the debt market can serve as the basis for the development of the financial market as a whole, i.e. contribute to the creation of an effective channel for transforming savings into investments. Finally, a mature debt market allows the real sector to determine the level of profitability in the economy with minimal risk and objectively assess the cost of investment projects, and the financial sector has the opportunity to form optimal portfolios.

The success of anti-crisis management largely depends on the state of the material basis for improving the standard of living of the country's population. The main factor in this increase is labor productivity, which largely depends on scientific and technological progress. And the latter, in turn, is influenced by history, culture, education, institutional factors and politics. Productivity is related to investment in human capital and in environmental quality.

Entrepreneurs must solve all these problems. But we need an environment that motivates business to vigorously modernize. However, in many of its features, the Russian economy today does not have the properties of a single national economic complex, i.e. it exhibits features of fragmentation.

This fragmentation of the economy is the main obstacle to economic growth. It clearly shows that in market conditions, the true measure of economic growth is not so much the rate of growth of gross domestic product as the degree of consolidation of the economy. Sustained economic growth, as opposed to economic recession, is the privilege of holistic and balanced systems.

Economic development is not sufficiently stable when unfavorable changes in external conditions in one or another sector cannot be compensated by the resources of other sectors. Domestic demand and supply, which form the backbone of the economy, are not oriented towards each other, are not coordinated and are developing along different trajectories. The fragmentation of the economy localizes competition and provokes inflation, as producers begin to focus on the maximum demand price. Such an economy exhibits low efficiency in the use of all types of resources, since fragmentation prevents their movement to the point of highest demand.

Only the state can provide a solution to this problem. No other institution is capable of achieving the necessary optimization of the structure of the national economy, introducing the achievements of scientific and technological progress into production, and overcoming the raw material orientation of exports. “In today’s social conditions, the state bears responsibility for the economy - and therefore for the economic fate of all people operating in it. The entrepreneur is responsible for his enterprise, and this is no small thing” - these are the words of the reformer of the post-war German economy Ludwig Erhard, spoken many years ago , are still relevant for us today.

Government regulation in this area comes down to active industrial policy, which is a set of tools and mechanisms for influencing economic development, i.e. system of public procurement, direct government lending, tax regimes and so on.

The government needs to determine a state economic policy that is understandable to everyone: how to develop energy, industry, agriculture as a food base, use natural resources, and transform housing and communal services. It is necessary to clearly formulate guidelines for social development, show our role in the development of science, education, culture, mobilize Russia’s existing competitive advantages, and above all the huge domestic market and significant technological and cultural potential.

The use of capital deserves special attention. Capital is not only money and the combined power of businessmen and corporations, it is also specific people who implement financial policies and make decisions that directly affect each of us. Capital has such characteristics as development, life, history.

An analysis of the history of capital shows that it goes through certain stages in its development. Therefore, our capital must, like once upon a time, for example, American or British, master not only the extraction, but also the primary processing of raw materials, form an industrial infrastructure with a sufficient supply of fuel, construction materials, transport routes, technologies and production for a subsequent rapid breakthrough into high, intelligent and promising technologies.

Such development requires significant concentration of production and the availability of large working capital. Making a profit and reducing danger depend on these factors market risks, effective technologies, foreseeable market structure and sequence of technology changes. It is in this vein that big business operates, shaping industrial policy at its own discretion and for its own benefit.

In this area, the state should not only be a partner of business, but also have its own long-term strategy, which would create incentives for the economic activity of each individual economic entity and the basis of which would be the following principles:

• ensuring that the interests of all participants in its implementation are taken into account;
• socio-economic orientation;
• a combination of government regulation measures and market mechanisms;
• creating favorable conditions to reduce negative consequences during structural transformations, and then to improve the standard of living of the population;
• targeted nature of the events and high responsibility of participants for the final results of their implementation;
• a system of contractual relations and a competitive basis for participants in the process of transformation in industry;
• justified centralization of resources in order to ensure the development of production and prevent negative trends in the use of scientific, production and intellectual potential;
• widespread use of rentals, leasing and investment competitions for the sale of state property;
• development and promotion of general motivation of demand in the markets of labor, capital, goods and services, technology, etc.

N. D. Kondratiev, the author of the well-known wave theory of economic development, argued that the transition from a downward stage of the economic cycle to an upward one is associated with deep modernization of the economy based on the emergence of fundamentally new technologies. The transition from steam to electricity, from manufacture to industry, lay at the heart of the industrial rise of European countries, especially England and France, in the 18th century. America's prosperity is largely due to the fact that during the Great Depression, new infrastructure solutions were laid out that “expanded” the consumption crisis.

Modern Russia is in a similar situation. Now it is important to determine what infrastructure and technological solutions will form the basis for long-term social recovery and dynamic economic growth. Overcoming the technological challenge of our time depends on these decisions. In practical terms, this first of all means the need to move away from unilateral inclusion in global economy through energy exports and short-term speculative investments and a more balanced participation in global economic processes through the integration of domestic scientific and technological potential, export of knowledge-intensive products and services, and connection to strategic technological alliances.

Insufficient visibility in modern Russian conditions of the domestic technology market leads to the fact that at the time of choosing a modernization strategy, many entrepreneurs simply do not have objective information about the possible range of technological innovations. The communication system does not always allow market participants to form a common vision, within the framework of which only successful individual innovative strategies are possible. It is no coincidence that the budgets of high-tech companies in Silicon Valley include decent amounts of money for the exchange of experience between employees of various private and government organizations. This is how the “mainstream” is formed, deviation from which often spells collapse for the company.

The development of industrial production, including its structural reorganization and re-profiling, becomes impossible without attracting serious financial resources on a long-term basis. Given their limitations, it is possible to allocate for two to three years the main types of commodity production (primarily high-tech products) and reform the enterprises involved in this process along the entire technological chain of production of the final product. This task becomes interregional and requires coordination and mutual assistance of territories within the framework of the general state policy of economic development.

A prerequisite for the implementation of industrial policy is the coordinated actions of all government bodies, banks and enterprises. At the same time, the political will of the authorities is necessary in terms of the selection of enterprises and directions for their development, as well as the desire and ability of bankers to provide long-term loans. The second condition for its implementation is the participation of a non-governmental body that unites industrialists and entrepreneurs, ready through their actions to promote and convince commodity producers and government structures of the need for structural and other reforms at specific industrial enterprises.

Generalization and understanding of specific models of behavior of enterprises in crisis conditions allows us to note the following trends:

• getting into a crisis phase inevitably forces managers to apply anti-crisis management measures;
• anti-crisis behavior of enterprises is often the opposite of those actions that are effective in conditions of economic growth or economic stabilization;
• in industry, various anti-crisis models of enterprise activity are spontaneously formed;
• An enterprise must rely primarily on its internal reserves and capabilities.

An analysis of the existing work practices of executive authorities and public organizations, scientists and crisis management specialists allows us to identify the main stages in the design of regional anti-crisis programs:

• 1) development and justification of the concept of socio-economic and scientific-technical development of the region for a certain period;
• 2) formulation and ranking of problems identified during the development of a program for the implementation of the adopted concept;
• 3) identification of anti-crisis goals and tasks that require solutions;
• 4) development of anti-crisis measures in priority areas of development of the region;
• 5) conducting a feasibility study of anti-crisis measures and investment projects;
• 6) economic justification and balancing of action plans and projects with the needs and resources of the region, possible state assistance in attracting loans and providing other support.

It should be taken into account that each region has its own specific approaches to the formation of management concepts, the development of anti-crisis programs and mechanisms for their implementation.

A socio-economic crisis is usually accompanied by a massive and ineffective allocation of labor and capital, and a drop in production volumes in the public sector of the economy. But from this sector to the state budget While the bulk of the revenue comes from the same sector, government spending is slowly being reduced. As a result, the costs of social goals the state reduces it when the need for social protection, on the contrary, increases sharply.

In such conditions, the state's social policy strategy must include regulation of market forces.

It allows you to solve problems associated with market failure and the organization of the process of income redistribution. The main focus of this activity is the prevention of absolute poverty. The fight against poverty is the basis for maintaining the standard of living of the population and includes social insurance and income equalization. The goal of the fight against poverty is to ensure conditions under which no citizen or family falls below a certain minimum level of income or consumption. Target social insurance– to protect every person from a sudden and unacceptably strong decline in living standards. The goal of income equalization is to ensure that each person is able to effectively redistribute their own income.

If there is a prolonged fiscal crisis, poverty alleviation takes precedence over other functions provided by cash transfers, such as insurance and income equalization. An improvement in the state budget will serve as a basis for intensifying other functions of cash benefits. If the state eliminates family benefits, it will worsen the impact of the crisis on families. These benefits stabilize consumption at a difficult time for their recipients.

If the income equalization policy is not effective, irreversible consequences may arise at the personal level and negative trends in the formation of human capital may appear.

Need for government funding medical care dictated by the need, on the one hand, for production public goods and, on the other hand, ensuring broad access of the population to health services: government activities in the field of health, for example, such as vaccination and health education programs, require budgetary funds; elderly people and other economically inactive segments of the poor also need subsidies; the consumption of medicines, in particular those produced in limited quantities, is also subsidized; financing of measures to protect public health is carried out mainly by the state.

But often the state’s activities in the economy do not correspond to development goals social sphere.

• Civil Code of the Russian Federation: part one of November 30, 1994 No. 51-FZ; part two of January 26, 1996 No. 14-FZ; part three of November 26, 2001 No. 146-FZ; part four dated December 18, 2006 No. 230-Φ3. When independently studying the normative legal acts mentioned in the textbook, it is necessary to take into account the changes and additions that have been made to them since they came into force. The official texts of the documents can be found on the Official Internet Portal legal information(pravo.gov.ru). In addition, you can contact such help systems as “ConsultantPlus”, “Garant”, etc.
• The Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993 (taking into account amendments made by the Laws of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of December 30, 2008 No. 6-FKZ and 7-FKZ).

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Russian International Academy of Tourism

Faculty: Tourism Management

Department: Management and Information Technologies

COURSE WORK

By academic discipline"Crisis management"

topic: State regulation of a crisis situation

Student of the 3MT6 group course

Shanaeva Anastasia Evgenievna

INTRODUCTION

1. Theoretical and methodological foundations for studying the problems of state regulation of crisis situations

1.1. The concept of crisis, analysis of types of crisis and crisis situations

1.2 System of state regulation of crisis situations

2. TYPES OF STATE REGULATION OF CRISIS SITUATIONS

2.1. Basic processes of government regulation

3. MECHANISMS OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION IN CONDITIONS OF THE WORLD ECONOMIC CRISIS

3.1 The main problems of managing the crisis situation of 2008-2009

3.2 Analysis of the government’s work to regulate the crisis of 2008-2009

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTION

The state is a public institution created and maintained through the purposeful activities of people living in a certain territory with the aim of expressing and realizing their will (interests), as well as coordinating and harmonizing the interactions of all citizens (social groups) in the economic, social and political spheres of life.

At the turn of the XX-XXI centuries, the functions of the state were subjected to transformations. In fact, government regulation acts as an organizing principle, a kind of control parameter. By restoring through its actions a feedback mechanism that is disrupted for some reason, the state creates its additional links, thus fulfilling its role in the process of self-organization of complex systems.

If necessary, it can take on some of the functions of economic agents. But, in essence, in this case it plays the same role - it creates conditions for the economy to fulfill its functions in society.

From the end of 2008 to the beginning of 2009, Russia began to feel the full consequences of the global economic crisis, while crawling into recession - one of the last economically developed countries. The crisis is accompanied by a set of devaluation processes, the collapse social programs and guarantees, finally, with massive layoffs and layoffs of workers, the number of which, according to official data alone, reached more than 6 million of the economically active population at the end of 2008.

In the context of the global economic crisis, the role and importance of government regulation of crisis situations is steadily increasing. The state must pursue a reasonable and balanced monetary and financial policy, the state must help overcome the crisis in the real sector of the economy, and provide support to socially vulnerable citizens affected by the global economic crisis.

1. THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORKS FOR STUDYING PROBLEMS OF STATE REGULATION OF CRISIS SITUATIONS

1.1 The concept of crisis, analysis of types of crisis and crisis situations

In the life of an enterprise, crises or the threat of crises are a constant phenomenon. The root cause and possibility of occurrence economic crises is the gap between the production and consumption of goods.

R.R. Akhmetov notes that “the essence of the economic crisis is manifested in the overproduction of goods in relation to effective aggregate demand, in the disruption of the process of conditions for the reproduction of social capital, in mass bankruptcies of firms, rising unemployment and other socio-economic upheavals.”

The first economic crisis occurred in England in 1825, where by that time capitalism had become the dominant system. The next crisis, which broke out in 1836, engulfed Great Britain and the United States. The crisis of 1847 affected almost all European countries. The first world economic crisis dates back to 1857. It was the deepest crisis since the beginning of capitalist development. Crisis of 1873-1878 covered most European countries and the USA and surpassed all previous ones in duration. World economic crises occurred in 1900-1903, 1907, 1920, but all of them could not be compared with the world crisis of 1929-1933. It lasted more than four years and covered the entire capitalist world and all spheres of the economy.

After this crisis, the depression was prolonged. Following some recovery in 1937, a new crisis arose, characterized by the fact that it was not preceded by a recovery phase. New crisis although it was weaker than the previous one, it was very acute. The total volume of industrial production in the capitalist world decreased by 11%, and in the United States by 21%, automobile production decreased by 40%. The development and aggravation of this crisis was interrupted by the Second World War of 1939-1945.

After World War II in 1948-1949. A local economic crisis erupted, sweeping the United States and Canada. In the USA volume industrial products then fell by 18.2%, in Canada by 12%, and the total volume of industrial production in developed capitalist countries decreased by 6%. Economic crises in capitalist countries also occurred in 1953-1954 and 1957-1958. But the deepest post-war period became the economic crisis of 1973-1975. E.A. Utkin notes that “it spread to all capitalist countries and was characterized by a high level of inflation.” A characteristic feature of this crisis was its intertwining with deep structural crises that affected the most important areas of production - energy, raw materials industries, including agriculture, as well as the currency system.

The points of view of various scientists on the causes of economic crises are very contradictory. The fundamental difference between K. Marx’s position on this issue is that he saw the reasons for the cyclical nature of capitalist reproduction in the very nature of capitalism, directly in the contradiction between the social nature of production and the private nature of the appropriation of its results.

Representatives of the neoclassical and liberal schools put forward various causes of economic crises, without connecting them with the nature of capitalism. Many of them consider the cause of crises to be underconsumption of the population, causing overproduction. But the resulting lack of consumption (solvency) is more a consequence than a cause of crises.

Economic science has now developed a number of different theories that explain the causes of economic cycles and crises. P. Samuelson, for example, notes the following as the most famous theories of cycles and crises in his book “Economics”:

Monetary theory, which explains the causes of the cycle by the expansion (contraction) of bank credit;

The theory of innovation, which explains the economic cycle by the use of important innovations in production;

A psychological theory that interprets the cycle as a consequence of waves of pessimistic and optimistic mood sweeping the population;

The theory of underconsumption, which traces the cause of the cycle to too much income going to rich and thrifty people compared to what can be invested;

Overinvestment theory, which believes that recessions are caused by overinvestment rather than underinvestment;

Sunspot-weather-crop theory.

When assessing the views of economists on crises and their causes, it should be noted that these views have been transformed over time along with changes in the socio-economic reality itself. Taking this into account, the point of view of a number of Russian economists deserves attention, who distinguish three stages in the development of views on cyclicality in crisis phenomena.

The first stage covers the period from the beginning of the 18th century. until the mid-30s. XX century During this period, the prevailing view was that economic crises were either completely impossible under capitalism, or that they were only random in nature, and that the system of free competition was capable of overcoming them on its own.

The second stage covers the period from the mid-30s to the mid-60s. XX century The identification of this period is associated with the works of J.M. Keynes, and primarily with his conclusion that economic crises (more precisely, depression, stagnation) are inevitable under classical capitalism and stem from the nature of the inherent market. Keynes was one of the first among Western economists to directly state that the capitalist market includes various manifestations of monopoly and is combined with government regulation, which makes prices and wages inflexible. As a fundamentally necessary means of smoothing out the problems of crisis and unemployment, Keynes put forward the idea of ​​​​providing government intervention in the economy in order to stimulate effective aggregate demand. His merits in the study of the cyclical factor should also include the multiplier theory he developed, which subsequently became widely used in the analysis of the causes of cyclicality.

The third stage in the study of the causes of economic cycles is the period from the mid-1960s. until now. During this period, firstly, special attention began to be paid to the distinction between exogenous (internal) and endogenous (external) causes of the cyclical nature of a market economy, and it was endogenous factors that became the object of close study. Secondly, the position of a number of experts has been determined, according to which the state in developed countries does not always strive for anti-crisis regulation, smoothing out cyclical fluctuations and stabilizing economic equilibrium, but often pursues a so-called pro-cyclical policy, that is, it provokes and maintains cyclicality.

A.I. Dudnik notes that “research into the nature of the cyclical nature of reproduction under conditions of state regulation of the economy contributed to the development of new views and concepts on this issue.” These include the concepts of “equilibrium business cycle” and “political business cycle”.

The first reflects the development of the ideas of monetarism. According to this concept, the state, along with many of its inherent functions, plays the role of a kind of generator of monetary “shocks” that take the economic system out of equilibrium and thus support cyclical fluctuations in social reproduction.

The second concept (the “political business cycle”) is based on the fact that the relationship between the unemployment rate and the inflation rate is determined by the Phillips curve, i.e. there is an inverse relationship between these values: the lower unemployment, the faster prices rise. Its supporters believe that economic situation within the country significantly affects the popularity of the ruling party.

For an enterprise, there are external and internal causes of the crisis. External causes are those that the enterprise cannot influence, or this influence may be insignificant. External reasons include international and national factors.

International factors are influenced by reasons of a general economic nature ( economic cyclicality development of leading countries, the state of the global financial system, characterized by the policies of international banks), the stability of international trade, which in turn depends on concluded intergovernmental treaties and agreements (on the creation of free enterprise zones, cross-border trade, customs tariffs and duties), on international competition (increasing the market share of competing firms due to the use of more high technology or cheaper labor).

National factors can be determined by reasons of a political, economic-geographical, cultural, scientific and technical nature.

Thus, political stability and direction domestic policy states, implemented through law, are expressed in relation to entrepreneurial activity" and the principles of state regulation of the economy, as well as in relation to forms of ownership, measures to protect the rights of consumers and entrepreneurs. All this is accumulated in legislative norms and acts that determine the activities of enterprises.

Economic-geographical factors are characterized by the size and structure of needs, and, under certain economic conditions, by the effective demand of the population. These can also include the level of income and savings of the population, i.e. purchasing power, price level, the possibility of obtaining a loan, which significantly influence entrepreneurial activity, the phase of the economic cycle in which the national economy is located. A drop in demand, for example, characteristic of the corresponding phase of economic development, leads to increased competition, ruin or takeover of a bankrupt enterprise.

Cultural factors are manifested in habits, consumption norms and preferences for some goods over others.

Crises can be regular (cyclical), or periodic, which repeat with a certain pattern, and irregular.

Regular crises of overproduction give rise to a new cycle, during which the economy sequentially goes through four phases and prepares the basis for the subsequent crisis. They are characterized by the fact that they cover all spheres of the economy, reaching great depth and duration.

TO irregular economic crises include intermediate, partial, sectoral and structural crises. An intermediate crisis does not give rise to a new cycle, but interrupts for some time the course of the recovery or recovery phase. It is less deep and shorter in duration compared to periodic ones and, as a rule, is local in nature. Similar crises took place in capitalist countries in 1924 and 1927, and in 1953-1954 and 1960-1961. gg. such crises only affected the United States and Canada.

A partial crisis differs from an intermediate crisis in that it does not cover the entire economy, but some sphere of social reproduction. A typical example is the German banking crisis of 1932.

The industry crisis is affecting one of the sectors of the national economy. The reason for it can be a variety of reasons. These include: imbalances in the development of the industry, structural restructuring, overproduction. Such crises can be national and international. The latter include the world shipping crisis of 1958-1962. and the crisis in the textile industry in 1977

A structural crisis is a violation of the law of proportional development of social production. This is manifested in serious imbalances between industries, on the one hand, and the output of the most important types of products in physical terms, necessary for balanced economic development, on the other. In the 1970s The Western economy was paralyzed by energy, raw materials, and food crises.

Before the onset of the next periodic crisis, production reaches its highest level, behind which overproduction and an increase in supply are already hidden.

In this regard, questions naturally arise as to whether it is possible to predict the economic future, how to save an enterprise or household from collapse, what is the role of the state, what constitutes the mechanism of state regulation, etc.

From the position of regulation theory, crises can be classified in the following way:

? crisis as a result" external" shock. In this sense, a crisis is understood as a situation when the continuation of the economic development of a particular geographical community is blocked due to a lack of resources associated with natural or economic disasters;

? cyclical crises. Here, the crisis is a phase of eliminating tensions and disequilibria that have accumulated during the rise in economic mechanisms and social processes;

? structural (big) crisis. Any case of manifestation of the contradictory nature of long-term reproduction;

? crisis of the regulatory system. A situation where the mechanisms associated with existing system regulation are unable to change unfavorable market processes, although the accumulation regime remains quite viable;

? crisis of the mode of production. This crisis is characterized by an exacerbation of contradictions developing in the depths of the most important institutional forms - the forms that determine the regime of accumulation. During the crisis, the patterns on which the organization of production, the prospects for the profitable use of capital, the distribution of value and the structure of public demand are based turn out to be unviable. This is a situation when the entire dynamics of reproduction of a given particular economy is blocked.

Thus, a crisis -- this is an extreme aggravation of contradictions in a socio-economic system (organization), threatening its viability in the environment. The causes of the crisis may be different. They are divided into objective, related to the needs of modernization and restructuring, and subjective, reflecting errors and voluntarism in management, as well as natural ones.

1.2 System of state regulation of crisis situations

A crisis is a difficult transitional state of the economy. On the one hand, the crisis acts as a brake on economic development, which is expressed in falling prices, stock prices, bank interest, a reduction in production, a reduction in employment, and a drop in the profitability of enterprises. On the other hand, during a crisis, the foundations are laid for restoring the broken laws of economic movement and its further development. At the same time spontaneous market mechanism uses crisis parameters to resolve contradictions.

State policy in regulating crisis situations is to minimize economic and social damage caused by the bankruptcy of an organization. It is important to note that the ruin of ineffective enterprises is the most important factor in a market economy, ensuring its growth and development.

The state's anti-crisis policy is implemented at three levels:

· maintaining the competitiveness of the main sectors of the national economy;

· prevention and prevention of crises in economic and socially significant areas, such as banking or public transport;

· reducing the negative consequences of the bankruptcy of an enterprise, maximizing the full satisfaction of the interests of its employees and creditors.

The goal of state regulation of crisis situations is to ensure socio-economic stability in society. An immediate consequence of this main goal is the formation of starting conditions and the potential for economic growth and, on this basis, an increase in the well-being of the people This goal more specifically transforms the overall main goal, as can be seen from Figure 1.1.

Rice. 1.1. Purpose of government regulation

In areas of particular importance for economic and social life, the state applies special measures to prevent crisis situations.

Such measures can be divided into two groups: administrative and economic.

Administrative measures are based on specific targeted tasks aimed at achieving the goals of the system by forming its clear structure, creating conditions for preparation, adoption and implementation management decisions. Administrative measures express a direct impact on managed objects and primarily pursue the interests of the governing body. At the same time, the main share of responsibility for decisions made falls on the management body; the rights of managed objects are limited. The administrative orders applied are, as a rule, unambiguous, require mandatory execution, and do not allow significant deviations from the order.

Economic measures are based on general rules behavior, choice of maneuver economic strategy. They have an indirect impact on management objects and take into account economic interests enterprises of various forms of ownership. Also, economic measures presuppose the complete independence of business entities with high responsibility for the actions taken and their consequences and encourage business entities to prepare alternative solutions and select the optimal solution from the point of view of the interests of the given entity and taking into account acceptable economic risk.

Such measures make it possible to minimize the risks of bankruptcy of socially significant enterprises and also smooth out the negative consequences of such bankruptcy. Socially significant enterprises include city-forming and strategic enterprises, banks, insurance and financial companies, agricultural enterprises, as well as natural monopolies.

2. TYPES OF STATE REGULATION OF CRISIS SITUATIONS

Anti-crisis regulation is a government policy that is aimed at protecting against crisis situations and preventing the insolvency of enterprises, and, consequently, every citizen of the country. This is a policy within which ways are built for maximum use of scientific and technical potential and for the introduction of innovative development paths in all areas of activity. Also, anti-crisis regulation should be based on the previous experience not only of one’s own country, but also of the world. A policy of anti-crisis measures should be developed on the basis of knowledge gained in the past: what crises occurred, what is the business cycle, what exactly were the consequences (both negative and positive). After all, a crisis is often the beginning of a new vector, a change from outdated technologies to modern ones. That is why a complete diagnosis of all possible aspects is necessary.

There are two main forms of government regulation:

I. Direct, implying the direct impact of the state on aggregate supply and demand;

II. Indirect, suggesting indirect influence of the state.

Examples of direct effects include the creation of a public sector, income redistribution and economic programming; examples of indirect impact are the corresponding activities of the credit, financial and tax systems.

The government of the country is responsible for the events taking place, therefore the general situation in the state depends on state policy. To stabilize the economic situation and strengthen positions in the international arena government bodies implement protective measures in the following areas: legal (creation legal basis anti-crisis management, the creation of special bodies for control and examination of enterprises in crisis situations), methodological (monitoring and analysis of bankruptcies of enterprises), informational (analysis and accounting of the solvency of enterprises), economic and administrative (methods of regulating economic activity for stabilization), organizational (creation of conditions for peaceful, civilized resolution of conflict situations), social (protection of workers in the event of bankruptcy of an enterprise), personnel (training of specialists in the field of crisis management), environmental (environmental protection). Since the political and economic situation in the world as a whole and in a particular country is unstable, constant changes in established policies are necessary: ​​adjustment of tax rates, amendments to existing laws, tightening measures to control the activities of enterprises.

2.2 Processes of state regulation of crisis situations

State anti-crisis regulation of the economy is directly related to economic policy and is aimed at its implementation. To implement the goals of its economic policy, the state uses various forms and methods, which form the tools of state regulation of the economy.

Firstly, this is countercyclical regulation, which consists of a system of ways and methods of influencing the economic situation and economic activity, aimed at mitigating cyclical fluctuations. The negative consequences of the cyclical nature of development, especially the negative one, forces states to pursue countercyclical policies, including measures aimed at preventing sharp fluctuations in the development of production. These activities are in the opposite direction of the developing economic situation at each phase of the economic cycle.

The main measures of countercyclical policy include:

1. Monetary policy is government actions that affect the amount of money in circulation, that is, the money supply. During booms, the government cuts money supply, the amount of money in circulation, and during a crisis, on the contrary, increases.

2. Fiscal policy, which involves maneuvering taxes and government spending in order to influence the economy. During economic growth, taxes increase and budget expenditures decrease, and accordingly, during a crisis, taxes reduce and budget expenditures increase. Government spending cuts reduce aggregate demand, leading to a fall in production, income and employment. An increase in government spending causes a reverse reaction: aggregate demand increases, production expands, incomes increase, and unemployment decreases.

3. Salary policy. It is structured as follows: during booms, wages are reduced, and during periods of crisis, the opposite measure is taken - wages are increased.

4. Investment policy. This measure involves reducing government spending during economic booms and increasing public investment during a crisis.

The next method of regulation is to control the refinancing rate. The refinancing rate is the annualized interest rate payable central bank countries for loans provided credit institutions. This measure involves increasing the rate during periods of crisis and weakening the rate during booms. You can trace how the rate changed during the global crisis of 2007 - 2010. By decrees of the Central Bank, rates changed as follows:

Regulation is also carried out in the form of an impact on production: state regulation in this area comes down to an active industrial policy, the basis of which is the following principles: (ensuring that the interests of all participants in its implementation are taken into account, socio-economic orientation, a combination of state regulation measures and market mechanisms, targeted nature events, a system of contractual relations and a competitive basis for its participants, the widespread use of rentals, leasing and investment competitions for the sale of state property).

Normative legislative activity also carries out regulation. The fundamental document is the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Its norms in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 76 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation have “direct effect throughout the entire territory of the Russian Federation.” The main document is also the Federal Law “On the Insolvency (Bankruptcy) of Enterprises” No. 127-FZ of October 26, 2002.

3. MECHANISMS OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION DURING THE WORLD ECONOMIC CRISIS

3.1 The main problems of managing the crisis situation of 2008-2009

More than ten years have passed since the 1998 crisis, and during this time economic growth in our country has increased and people’s well-being has improved. But at the end of 2007, Russia again faced a serious economic problem - the global economic crisis, which led to a drop in production, increased unemployment and a decrease in household incomes.

The impact of the global economic crisis has its own characteristics that are characteristic of our country, and they are associated with accumulated deformations in the structure of the economy and the underdevelopment of a number of market institutions, including the financial system.

For the Russian economy, the main problem is the following - a very high dependence on the export of natural resources. Oil and gas exports, exports of metals and other raw materials still play a key role in our economy. But as a result of the crisis, prices and demand for almost all Russian raw materials exports have decreased.

The next problem is the lack of competitiveness of non-commodity sectors of the economy, that is, when problems began in the commodity sectors, problems from these industries began to spread to related ones. And as a result, there was a significant drop in industrial production, an increase in the number of unemployed, decreased wages and a number of other negative consequences.

The third problem is the insufficient development of the financial sector, namely banks. Many Russian enterprises, which developed quite quickly in the pre-crisis years and entered foreign markets, could not count on financing within the country. Loans from the Russian banking system were more expensive, and loan terms were shorter, which forced borrowings abroad. But during a crisis foreign markets capital has become unavailable to the enterprise.

In the pre-crisis years, the national economy developed largely due to external sources- these are high prices for raw materials, cheap loans from foreign banks. But at the beginning of the crisis, Russia needed to find internal sources of growth to overcome the crisis and ensure long-term sustainable development.

In October - December 2008, the government began implementing anti-crisis measures, prompted by the fact that the crisis began to have a serious impact on the Russian economy, and there was a sharp drop in production. The Anti-Crisis Program of the Government of the Russian Federation for 2009 was adopted, which was aimed at improving the financial and economic condition of the country.

This Program included a number of priority areas:

1. Fulfilling social obligations to the population, which meant providing support to citizens most affected by the crisis: creating temporary jobs; allocation of funds for retraining and development of small businesses.

2. Strengthening the national economy: activating domestic demand for domestic goods; support for enterprises introducing innovations.

3. Support for innovative projects; support for energy-saving technologies and the development of high-tech industries, including aircraft and shipbuilding, the space industry, and nuclear energy.

4. Development of competition and improvement antimonopoly regulation; reduction of the list of goods that are subject to mandatory certification; anti-corruption activities; supporting small and medium-sized businesses by reducing taxes and expanding access to government procurement.

5. Increasing the efficiency of the banking system by expanding the resource base and increasing the liquidity of the financial system; by increasing the availability of bank loans for enterprises in the real sector, ensuring bank rehabilitation.

6. Carrying out the macroeconomic policy of the Government of the Russian Federation and the Bank of Russia, aimed at maintaining a stable position of the ruble exchange rate and reducing inflation, as well as pursuing monetary policy.

The results of anti-crisis measures of the Government of the Russian Federation for 2009 were: GDP growth; a sharp slowdown in inflation; reduction in the unemployment rate throughout the country. The decline in industrial production also slowed, and citizens' incomes increased. “In 2009, we not only solved urgent problems, but also did not waste time on systemic reforms. All this allows us, without slowing down, to move from anti-crisis management to sustainable innovative development,” - this is how V. expressed the results of anti-crisis measures for 2009. V. Putin.

Despite the positive results, it cannot be said that the situation in the country has completely returned to normal. This is due to the fact that the emerging positive trends were of a fickle and unstable nature, as a result economic indicators have not risen to pre-crisis levels. Therefore, it was decided to continue the anti-crisis policy in 2010 in order to maintain and strengthen positive trends and eliminate “residual” negative consequences. Among the priority areas, emphasis was placed on ensuring social stability, supporting the revival of the economy and implementing measures to solve the problems of the Russian economy, including improving the institutional environment, building a new regulatory model, creating the necessary economic conditions for the transition from the anti-crisis regime of the economy to solving modernization problems .

Therefore, an improvement was planned in 2010 general situation in the country by improving the quality of life, reducing unemployment, modernizing enterprises, creating new jobs and normalizing the activities of the banking system.

I would like to say that no innovation can work without mistakes in the first steps, the country adopts the experience of developed countries, develops areas for improvement, and then much depends on the methods of implementation.

3.2 Analysis of the government’s work to regulate the crisis of 2008-2009

Crisis of 2008 - 2009 turned out to be a serious test for our country. The peculiarity of the current situation was that the main negative trends were a consequence of developments in the global economy.

Since for Russia the observed economic recession was unique, then predicting its duration and consequences becomes a difficult task. The decisions of the authorities to minimize its consequences also depend on how accurately the characteristics of the crisis are determined, namely its depth and duration.

The program of anti-crisis measures of the government of the Russian Federation for 2009 provides an optimal combination of anti-crisis measures and long-term projects aimed at building a new, more efficient economy. The priorities of the program are as follows: fulfilling the state’s social obligations to citizens, preserving and developing industrial and technological potential, developing competition and reducing administrative pressure on business, increasing the stability of the national financial system, ensuring macroeconomic balance, maintaining a course for the stability of the national currency, reducing inflation; taking actions to improve the efficiency and competitiveness of the economy, accelerating the transition to an innovative type of development.

Seven main priorities of the government's work to regulate the crisis of 2008-2009.

1. The state’s public obligations to the population are fulfilled in full. Citizens and families most affected during the global economic crisis were provided with support. This involves strengthening social protection of the population, increasing the volume and quality of social and medical services, and improving the situation with drug supply, especially vital drugs. Particular attention is paid to preserving labor potential. The scope of government activities in the field of employment, combating the growth of unemployment, and the development of retraining and retraining programs for workers at risk of dismissal have been expanded;

2. Industrial and technological potential for future growth must be preserved and enhanced. The government will not invest taxpayers' money in maintaining inefficient industries. At the same time, enterprises that have increased their efficiency in recent years, invested in the development of production and the creation of new products, and increased labor productivity, have the right to count on state assistance in solving the most pressing problems caused by the crisis;

3. The basis for post-crisis recovery and subsequent progressive development should be domestic demand. Weakening the dependence of economic growth on external factors and making the most efficient use of internal resources will be the government’s key tasks in the coming years. In a crisis, domestic demand from the state (state investment and government procurement) will play an important role, but as the situation stabilizes, private demand (demand for housing, consumer goods, domestically produced services) will play an increasingly important role, and the Government will take all necessary measures to increase it.

4. The crisis is not a reason to abandon the long-term priorities of modernizing the country. This work will be intensified and accelerated. The main modernization task of the government is to change the existing model of economic growth. Instead of "oil" growth, we must move to innovation. The most important innovative processes will be supported, including increasing the energy efficiency of the economy. Investments in human capital - education and healthcare - will be a key priority for budget spending. Infrastructure facilities necessary to improve the efficiency of the economy must be implemented, while the efficiency of spending both budget and private funds will be significantly increased.

5. Business is freed from official pressure. The government will continue to reduce administrative barriers to business, which are one of the causes of corruption. A new set of measures will also be proposed to allow small businesses to develop successfully during the crisis.

6. The economy must be based on a strong national financial system. The government is making all necessary efforts to normalize the functioning of the financial sector, including the banking and insurance systems, the stock market, to ensure that the necessary volumes of investment resources enter the economy. At the same time, special attention is paid to the speed of decision-making and implementation.

7. Government and Central bank implement a responsible macroeconomic policy aimed both at maintaining macroeconomic stability and at creating the necessary conditions and incentives for increasing household savings, increasing the investment attractiveness of the economy, and creating a qualitatively different model of economic development. This assumes a balanced budget policy, maintaining the equilibrium exchange rate of the ruble. Monetary policy will be aimed at combating the liquidity crisis in the financial sector while simultaneously reducing inflation. The measures taken should lead to increased confidence in national currency, increasing the level of monetization of the economy, reducing inflation, thereby providing the necessary conditions for restoring sustainable economic growth. crisis economy cyclicality recovery

The Government of the Russian Federation and the Bank of Russia took measures to improve Russian economy in 2009. Among the main ones we can highlight the following: strengthening social protection of the population, ensuring guarantees of social and medical care, governmental support employment sector (695.8 billion rubles allocated); social protection (RUB 447.9 billion); co-financing regional programs aimed at reducing tension in the labor market of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (43.7 billion rubles); increase in the amount of unemployment benefits (RUB 29.8 billion); Conducting weekly monitoring in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation of employee dismissals due to the liquidation of organizations or reduction in the number or staff of employees, as well as underemployment of the organization’s employees; maintaining and increasing industrial and technological potential (RUB 675.4 billion); general support for the real sector and work with systemically important enterprises (302.0 billion rubles); tax incentive measures (RUB 296 billion); support for certain sectors of the economy (RUB 373.4 billion); providing financial support to enterprises of the military-industrial complex (RUB 70 billion); increasing the stability of the national financial system (RUB 485 billion); interaction between the Government of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation on the implementation of anti-crisis measures (300 billion rubles).

Thus, the most significant negative consequences of the financial crisis, which are widespread, were listed above. In fact, this is what happened in 2008-2010 in the economy and social sphere. There were indeed many problems and they had to be solved comprehensively.

The global economic crisis was systemic in nature, affecting most sectors of the economy and social sphere in each country, influencing the structure of the world economy and the principles of international economic relations. There was a high probability that the crisis would be prolonged. The government took these factors into account when developing and implementing anti-crisis measures and proceeded from the need to maintain the necessary amount of accumulated financial resources to solve both anti-crisis tasks and strategic development tasks in subsequent years.

As a result, Russia managed to get out of the crisis, this indicates that the state is making the right decision in regulating such situations. There are still problems and gaps in existing programs, because nothing is perfect. Therefore, it is important to take into account the experience of past years and make amendments to anti-crisis measures programs in order to minimize losses during crisis situations.

CONCLUSION

Global economic crisis of 2008-2009. was the result of the failure of the existing financial system as a result of poor quality regulation, which is why huge risks were not properly taken into account.

Global financial regulatory institutions have not responded to the events occurring in recent years with adequate actions, which confirmed the inconsistency of their activities with the needs of the modern world. Due to the lack of tools to prevent and minimize the consequences of the crisis, the world is faced with serious economic turmoil and, as a result, growing global social instability.

In the context of globalization, for the normal functioning of the world economy, there is a need for a stable, predictable and functioning according to pre-known rules international monetary and financial system, which is based on the maintenance of macroeconomic and financial discipline leading world economies. Crisis of 2008 - 2009 showed that maintaining such discipline remains an unsolved task, both for sovereign states and for leading companies operating in global markets.

In addition, the global economic crisis indicates the need to abandon standard approaches and requires the adoption of collective, internationally agreed upon decisions, aimed, in essence, at creating a system for managing the globalization process. All countries need to act as decisively as possible to restore sustainable economic development and confidence and stability in financial markets.

The new international structure of financial relations, according to D.A. Medvedev, should be built on the principles of: compatibility of activities and harmonious standards of national and international regulatory institutions; democracy and equal responsibility for decision making; achieving effectiveness based on the legitimacy of international coordination mechanisms; transparency of the activities of all participants; fair distribution of risks.

In general, it is difficult to overestimate the role of the state in the economy. It creates conditions for economic activity, protects entrepreneurs from the threat of monopolies, meets society’s needs for public goods, provides social protection low-income segments of the population, resolves issues of national defense. On the other hand, government intervention can, in some cases, significantly weaken the market mechanism and cause significant harm to the country’s economy. But government intervention in market economy still necessary. The only question is to what extent and by what methods this intervention should be carried out.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Albegova I.M. State economic policy/ I.M. Albegova, R.G. Emtsova, A.V. Kholopov. -M.: Business and service, 2008

2. Akhmetov R.R. On the impact of the global financial crisis on Russian financial markets. Finance and credit. - 2008.No.28.

3. Gamzaeva G.E. Anti-crisis management: essence, goals, objectives. 2007. P. 126.

4. Dontsova L.V. Issues of state regulation of the economy: main directions and forms / "Marketing in Russia and abroad", 2009. P.12

5. Dokhina R.R. Main trends of state regulation at the present stage of market relations in Russia / R.R. Dokhina: Academy of Management "TIBSI":2009

6. Dudnik A.I. Crisis management. 2005. P. 14.

7. Kovan S.E. Theory of anti-crisis enterprise management: textbook \ S.E. Cowan, L.P. Mokrova, A.N. Ryakhovskaya; edited by M.A. Fedotova, A.N. Ryakhovskaya. - M.: KNORUS, 2009. - p. 29-32.

8. Korotkov E.M. Anti-crisis management: textbook (GRIF). -M.:INFRA-M, 2007

9. Kushilin V. - state regulation of the economy: urgent decisions// Magazine "Economist". 2007 No. 11

10. Utkin E.A. Crisis management. M.: EKMOS, 2005. P. 79.

11. Ushanov P.V. Anti-crisis management: socio-psychological aspects. Money and credit. 2008. P. 63.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

State regulation of the economy in a market economy. Economic cycles of the initial period (in the era of classical capitalism) and modern ones. Types of state regulation of crisis situations. Basis for the classification of crises.

test, added 05/04/2012


Methods of government regulation and reasons for government intervention in the market economy. The essence of direct (administrative) and indirect (economic) methods. System of economic regulation instruments. Financial and monetary policy.

abstract, added 03/03/2009


Subject, scientific foundations and concepts of state regulation of the economy, the role and place of the state in economic systems and market economic models. The concept, essence and types of national planning and antimonopoly regulation.

course of lectures, added 01/31/2012


Crises in socio-economic development. Trends in the occurrence and resolution of economic crises. State regulation of crisis situations. Crises in the public administration system. Cyclic development of crises in the development of an organization.

abstract, added 01/31/2010


Subject, objectives and methodology of state regulation of the economy in modern economic realities. Main directions of government regulation: social policy, financial policy and money turnover, regional development, ecology.

course work, added 06/02/2010


Main types of government intervention in a market economy. Types of state regulation of the economy. A combination of market and government mechanisms for regulating the economy. The most important areas of economic regulation in the Russian Federation.

course work, added 06/04/2015


Reasons for the cyclical nature of the economy and the main types of economic cycles. Phases industrial cycle and the mechanism for changing them. Anti-cyclical policy of the state and its features in modern Russia. State fiscal and monetary regulation.

course work, added 11/09/2011


The essence of market and state regulation in a “mixed economy”. Analysis of the situation in the residential real estate market during the financial crisis. Characteristic economic methods management of the real estate market in crisis situations.

abstract, added 10/07/2012


The essence of state regulation of the economy. Policy of state regulation of the economy. Social politics states. State financial policy: taxes, state budget. State regulation of the economy in Russia.

course work, added 12/13/2007


State regulation: strategy and driving forces of economic transformation. Economy as an object of social regulation. Modern tasks of state regulation. State mechanism regulation of economic processes.