“Kuzbass” and “Coal” in the Context of Perfecting Development Harmonization Mechanisms

Abstract 
This article continues the authors’ research on the problems of strategic planning in Kemerovo Oblast (Kuzbass) aimed to propose a model for regional development under external and internal challenges and threats within the official Kuzbass-2035 development strategy. The authors claim that one of the main problems of Kuzbass development is lacking a consensus between regional businesses and authorities on the matters of harmonious territorial development – which ultimately leads to its degradation against the background of visibly successful advancement processes in primary areas. The coal sector, the key one in the region, has been developing successfully, in part thanks to the “soft” stance of the regional authorities towards social and environmental standards, and an absence of proper control over the development of transport logistics. It is stated that the necessary conditions for harmonization are better business climate, inclusiveness, and innovative economics. The article also considers major channels and mechanisms of the harmonization process, including increasing investment in mineral production, managing localization, improving regional infrastructure, introducing new environmental and social standards, moving decision-making centers closer to resource extraction spots. As exemplified by tax administration in the coal sector, which is one of the most important harmonization channels, we show that balancing the interests of business and the territory is not its current goal. Using best practices of primary producing countries and regions, the authors propose ways to perfect this harmonization course. When examining localization issues, the emphasis is on the need to create extensive science and project capacities in Kuzbass, as well as establish effective channel management. We suggest discussing the use of other harmonization mechanisms mentioned here in our subsequent publications. 

Keywords 
Kuzbass, coal business, harmonization, best practices, mechanisms, taxes, budget, localization 
Funding 
The publication is prepared within the priority XI.174 (project No. XI.174.1.1 “Economy of Siberia and its Regions Among the External and Internal Challenges and Threats: Methodology, Trends, Forecasts”, No. АААА-А17-117022250133-9) according to the research plan of the IEIE SB RAS

Read article


References

1. Kryukov V. A. Social and economic “capitalization” of the Russian resource capacity. EKO [ECO], 2015, no. 2, p. 62–75. (in Russ.) 
2. Kuleshov V. V. (ed.). Resource regions of Russia in the “new reality”. Novosibirsk, IEIE SB RAS Publ., 2017, 308 p. (in Russ.) 
3. Sachs J. D., Warner A. M. Natural Resources Abundance and Economic Growth. National Bureau of Economic Research Working paper, no. 5398, December. Cambridge, MA, 1995. 
4. Van der Ploeg. Natural Resources: curse or blessing? Journal of Economic Literature, 2011, vol. 49, no. 2, p. 326–420. 
5. Ferranti De, Perry G., Lederman D., Maloney W. From Natural Resources to the Knowledge Economy. Washington, DC, IBRD, 2002. 
6. Kondratiev V. B. (ed.). Resource-based modernization model: opportunities and constraints. Moscow, IMEMO RAN Publ., 2016, 326 p. (in Russ.) 
7. Kryukov V. A., Sevastyanova A. E., Tokarev A. N., Shmat V. V. A modern approach to the laboration and selection of strategic alternatives for resource regions. Ekonomika regional [Economy of Region], 2017, no. 13 (1), p. 93–105. (in Russ.) 
8. Pacetti E. G. The Five Characteristics of an Inclusive Economy: Getting Beyond the Equity-Growth Dichotomy. In: The Rockefeller Foundation, December 13, 2016. (accessed 10.03.2019). 
9. Kondratiev V. From the resource slavery to the innovative freedom dream: is it possible?Perspektive [Prospects], 2014. October 7. (accessed 20.01.2019). (in Russ.)