Psychological Factors of Motivated Readiness to Labor in the Forest Manufacturing Industry of the Far East

Author(s):  
I. U. Makhova ◽  
E. V. Ilinykh ◽  
E. V. Dobrunova
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-353
Author(s):  
Sang Joon Lee ◽  

The article aims to examine the performance of trade and investment since the diplomatic normalization of relations between the Russian Federation (RF) and the Republic of Korea (ROK) and also suggests further areas for the development of economic cooperation between the two countries. The volume of trade between the two countries in 2019 has grown 116-fold compared to 1992. To increase trade volume, it is necessary to increase intra-industry trade to improve the mutual relationship. The direct investment of Korea into Russia has been increased, as well as diversified in different sectors. Korea’s total investment in Russia is approximately 2.75 billion USD, which is relatively small compared to investments made by Korea globally. Korea’s New Northern Policy seeks to strengthen cooperation with Russia. Korean companies must reevaluate the strategic importance of Russia. The lesson learnt from the previous experience of overcoming past crises is, first, to believe in the potential and capabilities of the Russian economy and market. The development of the Far East and the Arctic has made Russia’s energy supply chain more stable and flexible in responding to changes in the energy market. In addition, Russia is also becoming the center of the 4th Industrial Revolution thanks to its advanced scientific and technological capabilities, as well as the revival of its manufacturing industry. To advance economic cooperation between Russia and Korea, Korea has to invest in Russia’s global energy supply chain and participate in the formation of a global value chain in a certain industry by combining Russian advanced science and technology with Korean product development planning and global marketing capabilities. Specifically, The Far East, Arctic Development, and Triangle (or Quadrangle) Cooperation among ROK-DPRK-Russia (-China) will provide significant opportunities to Korean companies.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.A. Ushakov

В статье рассматривается вопрос различия социальноэкономического развития субъектов между собой по различным статистическим показателям. Для этого был рассчитан специальный коэффициент, с помощью которого проанализировано развитие субъектов по отношению друг к другу и динамика этого коэффициента. Для его полнейшего анализа был взят период с 2005 по 2017 г. с рассмотрением трехлетних периодов и каждого года в отдельности. Были посчитаны значения коэффициента по всем регионам с выделением регионов с наибольшими и наименьшими значениями. Показаны субъекты с наиболее положительной или отрицательной динамикой данного коэффициента. В ходе анализа коэффициента были выявлены взаимосвязи развития регионов между собой в период социальноэкономических кризисов и восстановительного периода после них. Было определено, что развитие регионов зависело от их специализации, экономикогеографического и транспортногеографического положения, агломерационного эффекта, а также качества управления. На примере субъектов Дальневосточного региона был произведен региональный анализ данного коэффициента. Особенным отличием Дальнего Востока от других регионов являлось то, что это территория нового освоения с активным развитием добывающих производств. Были даны объяснения динамики коэффициента на примере субъектов этого региона с их определенной особенностью. Была выделена взаимосвязь между коэффициентом сравнения социальноэкономических показателей с размером ВРП на душу населения и их сходная динамика. Также было установлено, что высокие показатели коэффициента прежде всего зависят от наличия добывающей промышленности в субъектах и от ее высокой доли в структуре ВРП. Другие факторы для этого коэффициента оказались менее значимы. К ним можно отнести обрабатывающие производства, транспорт, наличие больших и крупных городов для субъектов Дальнего Востока. Также была выявлена взаимосвязь динамики коэффициента по годам среди субъектов и вызвавшие их социальноэкономические явления. Как было установлено, динамика коэффициента сравнения социальноэкономических показателей имело общую характеристику для большинства субъектов Дальневосточного региона.The article considers the issue of differences in the socioeconomic development of the subjects among themselves according to various statistical indicators. For this, a special coefficient was calculated, with the help of which the development of regions in relation to each other and the dynamics of this coefficient are analyzed. For its fullest analysis, took the period from 2005 to 2017 with a consideration of threeyear periods and each year separately. The coefficient values were calculated for all regions with the allotment of regions with the largest and smallest values. The subjects with the most positive or negative dynamics of this coefficient are shown. During the analysis of the coefficient, the interconnections of the development of regions among themselves during the period of socioeconomic crises and the recovery period after them were revealed. It was determined that the development of regions depended on their specialization, economicgeographical and transportgeographical position, agglomeration effect, as well as the quality of management. On the example of the subjects of the Far Eastern region, a regional analysis of this coefficient was carried out. A special difference between the Far East and other regions was that this territory of new mastering with the active development of extractive industries. Explanations of the dynamics of the coefficient were given by the example of the subjects of this region with their specific feature. The relationship between the coefficient of comparison of socioeconomic indicators with the size of GRP per capita and their similar dynamics was highlighted. It was also found that high coefficient ratios primarily depend on the availability of extractive industries in the subjects and, first of all, on its high share in the structure of GRP. Other factors for this coefficient were less significant. These include manufacturing industry, transport, the presence of large and large cities for the subjects of the Far East. The relationship between the dynamics of the coefficient over the years among the regions and the socioeconomic phenomena that caused them was also revealed. As it was established, the dynamics of the coefficient of comparison of socioeconomic indicators bore a common characteristic for most subjects of the Far Eastern region.


2020 ◽  
pp. 108-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. A. Bryzgalin ◽  
Е. N. Nikishina

The paper investigates cross-cultural differences across Russian regions using the methodology of G. Hofstede. First, it discusses the most common approaches in measuring culture and the application of the Hofstede methodology in subnational studies. It identifies the critical issues in measuring culture at the regional level and suggests several strategies to address them. Secondly, the paper introduces subregional data on individualism and uncertainty avoidance using a survey of students across 27 Russian universities. The data allow to establish geographical patterns of individualism in Russia. It is demonstrated that collectivism is most prevalent in the Volga region, while individualism characteristic becomes stronger towards the Far East. The findings are robust to the inclusion of various controls and different specifications of the regression model. Finally, the paper provides a discussion about the potential of applying the sociocultural approach in economics.


1937 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 45-47
Author(s):  
R. G. S.
Keyword(s):  
Far East ◽  

1938 ◽  
Vol 7 (18) ◽  
pp. 205-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter A. Radius
Keyword(s):  
Far East ◽  

1936 ◽  
Vol 5 (18) ◽  
pp. 189-193
Author(s):  
Frederick V. Field
Keyword(s):  
Far East ◽  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document