![\"image_pdf\"](\"https:\/\/qje.su\/wp-content\/plugins\/pdf-print\/images\/pdf.png\" "\\"View")
<\/a>![\"image_print\"](\"https:\/\/qje.su\/wp-content\/plugins\/pdf-print\/images\/print.png\" "\\"Print")
<\/a><\/div>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/qje.su\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Emblema-MEZH-2.png\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nDOI 10.24411\/2413-046\u0425-2019-18066 <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n A TOOL FOR SHAPING SUSTAINABILITY IN THE NATIONAL ECONOMY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u0417\u0430\u0432\u0435\u0440\u044e\u0445\u0430 \u0410\u043d\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0441\u0438\u044f\n\u0421\u0435\u0440\u0433\u0435\u0435\u0432\u043d\u0430, <\/strong>\u0424\u0438\u043d\u0430\u043d\u0441\u043e\u0432\u044b\u0439\n\u0443\u043d\u0438\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0441\u0438\u0442\u0435\u0442 \u043f\u0440\u0438 \u041f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0435 \u0420\u0424, shas95@inbox.ru<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Summary: <\/strong>Efficiency (from the English. Effect ) \u2013 achievement\nof any certain results with the minimum possible costs or obtaining the maximum\npossible volume of production from a given amount of resources. That is, in the\nmost General sense, effectiveness is the degree to which a goal is achieved or the\nratio of the result to the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The\neffectiveness of the system is the property of the system to fulfill the goal\nin the given conditions of use and with a certain quality. Performance\nindicators characterize the degree of adaptation of the system to perform its\ntasks and are generalizing indicators of the optimal functioning of the system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the\nanalysis of the concept of efficiency it is advisable to use the development of\neconomic science, which is considered most fully and comprehensively. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Economic efficiency is about maximizing the benefits of available resources. To do this, the benefits and costs must be constantly compared, that is, a prerequisite for the effectiveness of rational behavior, which is to strive for maximum profit (result) at minimum cost. Economic efficiency can mainly be reduced to financial indicators.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Eco-economic\nefficiency \u2013 the availability to realize the goal in the most environmentally\nfriendly way (or to implement an environmental project or event), which is\neconomically feasible and has a positive economic result (profit).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Keyword: <\/strong>Social requirements, economic security, sustainable\ndevelopment, progress, society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Following the\nformulation of the goal, the problem of assessing the effectiveness of\nindicators of sustainable development is to determine the criteria for\ncompliance with this goal and the corresponding indicators of their assessment,\nquantitative or qualitative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Finally, the\nmost difficult task is to assess the cost-benefit ratio to the level of achievement\nof the goal and its significance. <\/p>\n\n\n\n It should be\nnoted that now the regulatory and methodological framework for assessing the\neffectiveness of the implementation of sustainable development indicators is\npractically not created. At the same time, since the relevant indicative\nsystems are introduced primarily within the framework of the formation of\nsustainable development management mechanisms, their effectiveness can be\nindirectly determined by analyzing the effectiveness of such management [2, p.\n32]. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Management\neffectiveness is generally defined as the achievement of a real and socially\nuseful specific management goal with minimal resources and management energy in\nthe optimal time, taking into account the circumstances of the external and\ninternal nature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sustainable\ndevelopment management aims to achieve and maintain such a state of a certain\nsocio-economic and natural system, which can be characterized by the definition\nof “sustainable development”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Management of\nsustainable development of the territory (region) requires the implementation\nof certain phased management actions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n At each of\nthe above stages, indicators of sustainable development carry out appropriate\nfunctions and to achieve proper efficiency in their implementation must meet\ncertain requirements [4, p. 68].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Assessment of\nthe state of sustainable development requires the formation of a system of\nrepresentative indicators that can provide :<\/p>\n\n\n\n For a\ncomparative analysis of the main components of sustainable development of the\nregion and its correlation with other regions, it seems appropriate to use the\nrelevant aggregated indicators \u2013 economic, social and environmental development\nindices, methodologically defined at the international level, special indices\n(human development, environmental sustainability, true savings, etc.) and the\nintegrated sustainable development index (currently, several methodological\noptions for its calculation have been developed).<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same\ntime, a more detailed analysis aimed at identifying the “weak points”\nof regional development requires the use of more specific and narrowly\nspecialized indicators. To this end, it seems appropriate to use a system of\nindicators covering the main substantive aspects of sustainable development in\neach of its three basic areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For strategic\nplanning and strategic forecasting, the key task is a comprehensive assessment\nof all components of sustainable development and identification of appropriate\ntasks both for each of them and for certain integral characteristics of the\nregion’s development. Therefore, at this stage, the most effective integrated\nassessment systems are seen, which include both simple indicators and some\naggregated indicators and are structurally formed according to the principles\nof “theme-problem-indicator” and\/or “goals-tasks-indicator”\n[6, p. 87]. In principle, the key tasks of strategic planning and forecasting\ncan be effectively solved and model system indicators “the\npressure-stoneacre”. But so far, the practical application of this\napproach “in its pure form” has revealed significant technical and\ninformational difficulties associated with the need to promptly obtain,\nprocess, interpret and analyze large amounts of information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A separate\napproach requires the formation of the use of indicator systems to monitor the\nstatus of implementation-<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regarding\nmonitoring, strategic and operational monitoring should be singled out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Strategic\nmonitoring involves monitoring the dynamics of changes in the state of the main\ncomponents of sustainable development and correlating them with the relevant\nstrategic objectives and plans. Therefore, for the implementation of strategic\nmonitoring suitable systems are seen, which include aggregated indices of the\nmain components of sustainable development and indicators and indicators on the\nbasis of which these indices are calculated [8].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Operational\nmonitoring requires, first of all, tracking the dynamics of changes in more\n“narrow” areas, especially those that are critical for assessing the\nsustainable development of a particular region. For a representative assessment\nof such changes in addition to the standard set of indicators, it is necessary\nto use special indicators that reflect the specifics of the structure of\nsustainable development of this region and make it possible to quickly monitor\nthe state of Affairs in its “critical points”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Direct\nmanagement of sustainable development of the region can be carried out both by\nadjusting the current plans and short-term forecasts, and through the adoption\nof direct management measures aimed at normalizing critical situations arising\nin certain areas and sectors of activity and have a negative impact on the\nsustainable development of the region. Therefore, the requirements to the\nsystem of evaluation of regional sustainable development for the implementation\nof direct control include the wording of the strategic and operational\nmonitoring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That is, for\nthe implementation of monitoring and measures of direct management of\nsustainable development of the region, the most effective are the assessment\nsystems of key (basic), additional and specific indicators. The first reflect\nthe most important parameters of regional development \u2013 the growth rate of GRP,\nthe dynamics of investment in fixed capital, changes in production in the main\nsectors, the scale of anthropogenic impact on the environment, the level of\npoverty, true savings, the human development index, and the like. The second\nallows us to assess the quality of regional macroeconomic policy \u2013 the nature\nof the economy, the technological level, income differentiation, the state of\nthe labor force and the like. Still others make it possible to take into\naccount the relevant regional specifics [10, \u0441. 80].<\/p>\n\n\n\n A separate\nand very important group of goals (functions) assigned to the system of\nindicative assessment of sustainable development of the region are the actual\ninformation goals. They provide for the rapid and systematic provision of\naccessible, understandable and representative information on the state of\nsustainable development to the public and to officials who influence management\ndecisions. To perform these functions, the relevant indicators must first meet\nthe requirements of simplicity of perception and unambiguity of interpretation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Informing the\npublic and officials about the status and dynamics of sustainable development\ncan be effectively achieved through a reduced list of aggregates, most of which\nare to some extent generally acceptable, methodologically defined at the\ninternational level and “cross-cutting”, i.e. used at different\nterritorial levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In some\ncases, when there is a significant imbalance of development in the region due\nto the presence of certain very problematic enterprises, industries, facilities\nand the like, as a General information it is advisable to use special\nindicators that reflect the state and dynamics of changes in such problematic\nparts of the relevant territorial system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From the\nabove analysis it becomes clear that there is no single correct decision on the\neffectiveness of a particular type of indicators, structure or model of the\nsystem for assessing the sustainability of regional development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Since the\nconcept of “sustainable development” is integrative and covers a very\nwide range of goals, objectives and areas of activity, the requirements for the\nsystem of assessments of the level of sustainability are very differentiated\ndepending on the specific purpose, functions and specifics of the relevant\nterritorial entity [1].<\/p>\n\n\n\n If we\nconsider the assessment of the sustainable development of the region in a broad\nsense, there is a place in the relevant system of indicators for almost all\ntheir types, types, structures and models. Separately:<\/p>\n\n\n\n High level of\naggregation indices \u2013 the index of sustainable development, indices of the main\ncomponents of sustainable development, generally accepted\n“international” indices \u2013 should be used for:<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to\nthis specificity, highly aggregated indices are effective in terms of:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Indicators\nand indices of low degree of aggregation is advisable to use for: <\/p>\n\n\n\n Accordingly,\nsuch indicators are effective in terms of:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Finally,\nsimple indicators should be used as a single mutually agreed system for:<\/p>\n\n\n\n That is, the\nsystem of simple indicators can be effectively used in the implementation of\nall stages and functions of assessing the sustainable development of the\nregion:<\/p>\n\n\n\n From the\npoint of view of assessing the effectiveness of great importance is the\nstructural construction of an appropriate system of indicators of regional\nsustainable development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From the\nabove analysis it follows that the most applicable and effective from the point\nof view of the balance of “costs” and “result” are now\nstructures of the type “theme \u2013 problem \u2013 indicator” (as an option \u2013\n“theme \u2013 subtheme \u2013 indicator”) and “goals \u2013 tasks \u2013\nindicator”. These approaches allow at the necessary level and with\nrelatively uncritical costs to ensure the implementation of almost all the main\nobjectives (functions) of regional sustainable development management [3, p. 72].<\/p>\n\n\n\n A model-based\napproach “pressure-state-response” should be used to evaluate\nindividual components of the regional sustainable development on which the\npossibility of operational obtaining the necessary amounts of information to\nmake calculations on the corresponding model. Development and implementation of\nevaluation models for the TSR remain highly relevant primarily for the\nimplementation of a comprehensive in-depth research in relation to sustainable\ndevelopment in individual regions. It is the model approach that allows the\nmost thorough and accurate monitoring of the state, dynamics and interrelations\nof all substantive aspects of sustainable development, conducting in-depth\nscientific analysis to determine statistical and substantive laws and formulating\nmethodological and methodological approaches for the implementation of\nappropriate management activities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Separately,\nit should be noted that both the main methodological approaches to the\nformation of regional sustainable development assessment systems, the most used\nin the Russian Federation (the system of key (basic), additional and special\nindicators) and in Ukraine (the”pyramid-step” formation of aggregated\nindicators in the main areas of assessment \u2013 economic, environmental and\nsocial) are acceptable in terms of the effectiveness of implementation. In\nfact, they can complement each other and be used within a single system of\nindicators for assessing the sustainable development of the region. [5] At the\nsame time, the “pyramid” structure of indicators and indices can form\nmost of the “key” indicators used in strategic planning, forecasting,\nmonitoring, etc., Additional and special indicators should be formed in\naccordance with the requirements of interregional analysis and the specifics of\nthe structure of sustainable development of a particular region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The\n“embeddedness” of the system of national and international statistics\nand its direct link with the system of national planning and forecasting is\ncrucial for the effectiveness of the regional sustainable development\nassessment system. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In terms of\npractical use, especially in operational terms, the calculation of indicators\nof sustainable development on the basis of standard statistics is a\nprerequisite for the proper effectiveness of indicators of sustainable\ndevelopment. Any “deviation” from this principle immediately\ncritically increases the cost (material, physical, psychological, etc.) to\nobtain the necessary information. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Finally, in\norder for information on sustainable development of the region to be properly\nused in the management system, it must be “in demand” in the\ndevelopment of planning and forecasting documents provided for by the current\nlegislative and regulatory framework. After all, it is on these documents that\nthe practical implementation of the government of the state and its individual\nregions is based. And if the system of assessment of regional sustainable\ndevelopment is developed without taking into account the relevant requirements,\nit can have purely scientific value, and in a practical sense, its use will be\nvirtually impossible [7, \u0441. 900].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Briefly\nsummarizing the review of the main approaches to assessing the effectiveness of\nthe implementation of sustainable development indicators, the following should\nbe noted:<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Normative\nand methodological support for assessing the effectiveness of the\nimplementation of sustainable development indicators has not yet been\ndeveloped. Despite this, analyze their performance from the point of view of\nassessment of efficiency of sustainable development management of the region.\nAt the same time, at this stage, the use of quantitative performance indicators\nis quite problematic and the corresponding analysis can be carried out\naccording to qualitative criteria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. To ensure\nthe effective implementation of a set of functions (goals) of sustainable\ndevelopment management in the region, the appropriate system of indicative\nassessment should include simple indicators and indices of different levels of\naggregation. The use of reduced systems and individual aggregate indices can be\neffective only in terms of solving individual local problems, for example:\ncomparative characteristics of the level of sustainable development and its\nmain components for different regions, informing the public about the main\nindicators of regional sustainable development, and the like. <\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. From the\npoint of view of achieving maximum efficiency, the structure of the system of\nindicators for assessing the sustainable development of the region should be\nformed mainly on the principles of “theme (problem)-indicator” and\/or\n“goals-objectives-indicator”. A model-based approach\n“pressure-state-response” should be used to evaluate individual\ncomponents of the regional sustainable development on which the possibility of\noperational obtaining the necessary amounts of information to make calculations\non the corresponding model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4. It is\nadvisable to include key (basic) indicators and additional and special\nindicators in the system of indicators for assessing regional sustainable\ndevelopment. The first may be indices of varying degrees of aggregation,\ncalculated on the basis of a system of indicators for the main areas of\nsustainable development. Additional and specific indicators are determined\nbased on the objectives of interregional analysis and the specifics of the\nstructure of sustainable development of a particular region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5. Systems of\nindicators for assessing regional sustainable development should be based on\nindicators and international statistics and be directly linked to the system\nand the basic documents for planning and forecasting national and regional\nsocio-economic and environmental development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Also in\nrecent years, there is a reassessment of the theory of transaction integration.\nSandholtz and stone Mir proposed a General integration theory, which is based\non the study of the process of exchange between transnational actors, the role\nof supranational organizations, the processes of institutionalization through\nthe introduction of new rules [9]. New approaches in transactional theory were\naimed not only at identifying favorable conditions for the development of\nintegration, but also to study the relationship of political interests, the use\nof common rules, the activities of supranational institutions, which are the\nmain factors of this development. It should be noted that this approach is\nsomewhat reminiscent of neofunctionalism theory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In our\nopinion, the dynamics of the development of European integration in recent\nyears most fully reflects the approach based on the concept of transnational\nexchange. Exchange which reflects the economic relations between agents of\ndifferent countries associated with the movement of any tangible and intangible\nassets. The most important forms of transnational exchange are thus international\ntrade in goods and services, capital flows, trade in stock instruments and\ncurrency values, labour migration, trade in technology, joint ventures and\ntransnational corporations, the sale of trademarks and other intangible assets,\nand joint research and development. The ability of supranational structures to\nmeet the requirements of exchange participants and introduce its rules\ndetermines the direction of further development of integration. This approach\nassumes that supranational governance should be in the interest of firms,\nsocial groups or individuals involved in transnational exchange and benefit\nfrom the introduction of European regulation instead of national regulation.\nThe development of transnational exchange requires the replacement of national\nregulation with supranational regulation, which forces national governments and\nEU institutions to develop and implement such regulation. Consequently, the\nlevel of development of supranational governance depends on the intensity of\ntransnational exchange in a particular sector in a certain period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While\ntransnational exchange is rapidly developing in a particular sector, it is\nincreasingly inefficient for governments to maintain a national type of\nregulation. Pressure on governments to adapt their policies to the new\nsituation is growing, leading to the development of supranational governance.\nThe introduction of General legislation contributes to the further development\nof transnational exchange in this sector and, through transfusion effects, in\nother sectors. There is an internal dynamics of the integration process.\nIntergovernmental negotiations and policy development are becoming an\nintegrated part of the process, the main driving force of which is the\ndevelopment of transnational society, the integration policy of supranational\norganizations and the expansion of the joint legislative framework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Governments\ncertainly have an interest in integration. They are looking for ways to\nincrease their autonomy vis-\u00e0-vis national social groups and bodies, as well as\nto increase their control over resources. Governments may resist supranational\ngovernance processes, but in doing so they have a negative impact on the\nwelfare of those involved in transnational transactions. Governments can also\nslow down integration processes or direct them towards self-interest. But\ngovernments do not have full control over the overall political process and its\noutcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Literary source<\/p>\n\n\n\n DOI 10.24411\/2413-046\u0425-2019-18066 A TOOL FOR SHAPING SUSTAINABILITY IN THE NATIONAL ECONOMY \u0417\u0430\u0432\u0435\u0440\u044e\u0445\u0430 \u0410\u043d\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0441\u0438\u044f \u0421\u0435\u0440\u0433\u0435\u0435\u0432\u043d\u0430, \u0424\u0438\u043d\u0430\u043d\u0441\u043e\u0432\u044b\u0439 \u0443\u043d\u0438\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0441\u0438\u0442\u0435\u0442 \u043f\u0440\u0438 \u041f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0435 \u0420\u0424, shas95@inbox.ru Summary: Efficiency (from the English. Effect ) \u2013 achievement of any certain results with the minimum possible costs or obtaining the maximum possible volume of production from a given amount of resources. That is, in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false},"categories":[145],"tags":[160],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p7IyHt-2Sq","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11062"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11062"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11062\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11063,"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11062\/revisions\/11063"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11062"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11062"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qje.su\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11062"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}