Korelsky, V. F. Fish, fishermen and fish industry in Russia / V. F. Korelsky. - Bremen : Krebs, [1993?]-.

manage the economically independent sections along the horizontal, since it was considered to be typical of the capitalist system. The interests of partners (social and economic) become the kernel of the economic mechanism. All the other elements (planning and economic instruments, organizational structures of control, information science, law) are the means of coordination of interests. The coordination of interests must be regarded as a form of resolving the contradictions between the partners. We can suppose that there are contradictions inherent in a certain sphere of production, which cannot be eliminated. But they can be resolved by means of an agreement on the mutually profitable basis. The coordinated interest is not the arithmetic sum of interests of the partners at different levels of the economic system. The self- accounting means of resolving contradictions in the process of coordination of interests is the most efficient Hence, we can infer that the organizational structures cannot be regarded to be of paramount importance in the process of elaboration of the control system of the fish economy complex. First, the technique of management must be elaborated as well as the form of coordination of interests and the resolution of contradictions, and then the most efficient structure of control must be chosen (worked out). With the transition to a complete cost accounting, an industrial enterprise becomes an economically independent commodity producer. When an enterprise becomes economically independent, i.e., passes to a complete cost accounting, the essence of the relations between the subjects of economic management, i.e., between the enterprises belonging to the fish industry complex, changes qualitatively. The enterprises must now maintain the relations of production and exchange on a gratis basis. This is an important aspect in the practice of management of the economy in our country. Now the problem of coordination of economic interests and the problem of estimation of the results of activity of every subject play a more significant role. Therefore, the system of interior (for one branch of industry) price formation has become inexpedient since it does not take into account the interests of separate subjects and the relative specificity of their production. It was formed to be applied to the control of structural subdivisions when the exchange concerns not the production but the technologies, and is far from being equivalent to the labor input of the partners oriented on the profit not from their specific product, but from the end product as a result of social labor. All the subjects are interested in the final results of the activity, none of them watch the relatively isolated turnover of the resources, the equivalence of the intrafactory exchange, the cost of the output of the intermediate products. These relations between the structural units of the fish industry complex were conditioned by the noble aim of the concentration of efforts of the collectives directed towards the results of common labor following from the specificity of the fish industry. The relative technological sequence of the production processes and the common problems defined the economic interests of the structural subdivisions of all basins and called forth the relations both of the collective interest and the collective responsibility. This excited curiosity and attracted like a magnet since it corresponded to the “ideology” of planned and distributive commanding system. The intra-economic cost accounting and various forms of a collective contract serve as the mechanism of the economic realization of these relations. Of course, here the 3 7