МурманшельфИнфо. 2014, N 2 (25).

Особенности социально-экономических условий Севера и Арктики Íàøè èññëåäîâàíèÿ ïîêàçàëè, ÷òî ðèñêè ðàçâèòèÿ, õà- ðàêòåðíûå äëÿ âñåõ ìîíîãîðîäîâ ÐÔ, â óñëîâèÿõ Àðêòèêè óñóãóáëÿþòñÿ äîïîëíèòåëüíûìè íåáëàãîïðèÿòíûìè ôàêòî- ðàìè. Ýòî ýêñòðåìàëüíûé êëèìàò, óäàëåííîñòü îò ýêîíîìè- ÷åñêèõ öåíòðîâ, íåðàçâèòîñòü òðàíñïîðòíîé, èíæåíåðíîé è ñîöèàëüíîé èíôðàñòðóêòóðû. Äåéñòâèå ýòèõ ôàêòîðîâ óäî- ðîæàåò ñòîèìîñòü æèçíè è çàòðàòû ìåñòíûõ áþäæåòîâ, îáî- ñòðÿåò ñîöèàëüíûå ïðîáëåìû, îãðàíè÷èâàåò âîçìîæíîñòè ðàçâèòèÿ ïðåäïðèíèìàòåëüñòâà è âíåäðåíèÿ èííîâàöèé [2, ñ. 58-59, 11, 12]. Äëÿ ðåñóðñíî-áàçèðîâàííûõ ìîíîãîðîäîâ, êîòîðûå ïðåîáëàäàþò íà ðîññèéñêîì Ñåâåðå è å ё Àðêòè÷å- ñêîé çîíå, îäíèì èç ãëàâíûõ ðèñêîâ ðàçâèòèÿ ÿâëÿåòñÿ âîç- ìîæíîå èñòîùåíèå ðåñóðñîâ, ñîçäàþùåå óãðîçó çàêðûòèÿ îñíîâíîãî ïðåäïðèÿòèÿ, à çà íèì è ãîðîäà. Îäíèì èç ïîñëåäñòâèé äåéñòâèÿ óêàçàííûõ íåáëàãîïðèÿò- íûõ ôàêòîðîâ, à òàêæå èíäèêàòîðîì íàëè÷èÿ ñîöèàëüíî-ýêî- íîìè÷åñêèõ ïðîáëåì, ÿâëÿåòñÿ òåíäåíöèÿ ê ñóùåñòâåííîìó ñîêðàùåíèþ ÷èñëåííîñòè íàñåëåíèÿ â áîëüøèíñòâå ìîíîãî- ðîäîâ ðîññèéñêîãî Ñåâåðà è Àðêòèêè. Íàïðèìåð, çà ïåðèîä ñ íà÷àëà ðûíî÷íûõ ðåôîðì (ñ 1990 ïî 2013 ãîä) ÷èñëåííîñòü íàñåëåíèÿ â 18 ãîðîäàõ ðîññèéñêîé Àðêòèêè, âêëþ÷åííûõ â îôèöèàëüíûé Ïåðå÷åíü ìîíîãîðîäîâ Ðîññèè 2013 ã., ñî- êðàòèëàñü ïî÷òè íà 30%, ò.å. ïðèìåðíî íà 300 òûñ. ÷åë. Èñ- êëþ÷åíèåì ÿâëÿþòñÿ ëèøü ìîíîãîðîäà ßìàëî-Íåíåöêîãî àâòîíîìíîãî îêðóãà, ãðàäîîáðàçóþùèå ïðåäïðèÿòèÿ êîòîðûõ îòíîñÿòñÿ ê íåôòåãàçîâîé ïðîìûøëåííîñòè. Âûñîêèå äîõîäû íåôòåãàçîâûõ êîìïàíèé îáåñïå÷èâàþò îòíîñèòåëüíî ëó÷øóþ ñîöèàëüíî-ýêîíîìè÷åñêóþ ñèòóàöèþ â ðåãèîíàõ è ãîðîäàõ áà- çèðîâàíèÿ ïðåäïðèÿòèé. Áîëåå ïîäðîáíàÿ õàðàêòåðèñòèêà ñî- âðåìåííîé ñîöèàëüíî-ýêîíîìè÷åñêîé ñèòóàöèè, â îñîáåííî- ñòè ñîöèàëüíûõ ïðîáëåì â ìîíîãîðîäàõ ðîññèéñêîé Àðêòèêè, ïðåäñòàâëåíà â ñòàòüå, îïóáëèêîâàííîé ïî ðåçóëüòàòàì èñ- ñëåäîâàíèÿ, âûïîëíåííîãî ïðè ó÷àñòèè àâòîðà â 2013 ã. [10]. Политика государства в отношении моногородов Âàæíûì èíñòðóìåíòîì ïîëèòèêè ðîññèéñêîãî ïðàâèòåëü- ñòâà ïî ïðåîäîëåíèþ ïðîáëåì ìîíîãîðîäîâ, êîòîðûé íà÷à- ëè ïðèìåíÿòü â ðàìêàõ àíòèêðèçèñíîé ïðîãðàììû ñ 2009 ã., áûëà ñõåìà îêàçàíèÿ ôèíàíñîâîé ïîääåðæêè ðåàëèçàöèè èíâåñòèöèîííûõ ïëàíîâ, ïðåäñòàâëÿåìûõ íà êîíêóðñíîé îñ- íîâå ìîíîãîðîäàìè-ïðåòåíäåíòàìè. Îáÿçàòåëüíûì óñëîâè- åì âûäåëåíèÿ öåëåâûõ ôåäåðàëüíûõ ñðåäñòâ áûëî íàëè÷èå ó ãîðîäà-ïðåòåíäåíòà Êîìïëåêñíîãî èíâåñòèöèîííîãî ïëàíà (ÊÈÏ) ìîäåðíèçàöèè ìîíîãîðîäà, ðàçðàáîòàííîãî â ñîîò- âåòñòâèè ñ ìåòîäè÷åñêèìè ðåêîìåíäàöèÿìè Ìèíðåãèîíà Ðîññèè. ÊÈÏ ÿâëÿåòñÿ äîêóìåíòîì ñòðàòåãè÷åñêîãî ïëàíèðî- âàíèÿ, ïîñêîëüêó, â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñ óêàçàííûìè ðåêîìåíäà- öèÿìè, äîëæåí îõâàòûâàòü ïåðèîä áîëåå 10 ëåò è âêëþ÷àòü óãëóáëåííûé àíàëèç ñîöèàëüíî-ýêîíîìè÷åñêîãî è ôèíàíñî- âîãî ïîëîæåíèÿ ìîíîãîðîäà ñ ïðèìåíåíèåì ìåòîäîëîãèè SWOT-àíàëèçà, âûðàáîòêó ñèñòåìû öåëåé è ïðèîðèòåòîâ áó- äóùåãî ðàçâèòèÿ, à òàêæå ìåõàíèçìà èõ ðåàëèçàöèè. Ïî÷òè âñå ñåâåðíûå è àðêòè÷åñêèå ìîíîãîðîäà ÐÔ â 2010-2011 ãã. îáåñïå÷èëè ðàçðàáîòêó ÊÈÏîâ, âûïîëíèâ îäíî èç ãëàâíûõ óñëîâèé äëÿ ïîëó÷åíèÿ ãîñóäàðñòâåííîé ïîääåðæêè èõ ðåàëèçàöèè. Íî èç 50 ìîíîãîðîäîâ ÐÔ, êî- òîðûì áûëè âûäåëåíû ñðåäñòâà èç ôåäåðàëüíîãî áþäæåòà â 2010-2011 ãã. (â 2010 ã. – 35, â 2011 ã.– 15 ìîíîãîðîäîâ), ëèøü òðè àðêòè÷åñêèõ ìîíîïîñåëåíèÿ ïîëó÷èëè ïîääåðæêó – ã. Êîâäîð, ã.ï. Ðåâäà Ìóðìàíñêîé îáëàñòè è ã. Ñåâåðî- äâèíñê Àðõàíãåëüñêîé îáëàñòè [10]. Íåñìîòðÿ íà âïîëíå îïðàâäàííûé ïîäõîä ê óñëîâèÿì âû- äåëåíèÿ ñðåäñòâ ãîñóäàðñòâåííîé ïîääåðæêè ìîíîãîðîäàì, ïðåäóñìàòðèâàþùèé íåîáõîäèìîñòü îñíîâûâàòüñÿ íà ïðèí- öèïàõ ñòðàòåãè÷åñêîãî ïëàíèðîâàíèÿ è óïðàâëåíèÿ èõ ðàç- âèòèåì, îðãàíèçàöèÿ ïðîöåññà è ïðàêòè÷åñêàÿ ðåàëèçàöèÿ ïëàíîâ â áîëüøèíñòâå ñëó÷àåâ íå îáåñïå÷èâàëè âûïîëíåíèå äàííûõ ïðèíöèïîâ. Èìåþòñÿ â âèäó ñëåäóþùèå îáñòîÿòåëü- ñòâà. Âî-ïåðâûõ, âíåçàïíûé, áåç íåîáõîäèìîé ïîäãîòîâêè, õàðàêòåð òðåáîâàíèé ñî ñòîðîíû ïðàâèòåëüñòâåííûõ îðãàíîâ î ïðåäîñòàâëåíèè ÊÈÏîâ ìîíîãîðîäàìè (îñîáåííî òåìè, ÷òî ïîïàëè â ñïèñîê 27 îñîáî ïðîáëåìíûõ, êîòîðûì îòâîäèëîñü íà ýòî ëèøü 1-2 ìåñÿöà). Î÷åâèäíî, ÷òî â òàêîé ñïåøêå íåâîç- Региональное развитие Region development Specific features of Northern and Arctic socioeconomic conditions During our researches we have found out that common developing risks for all Russian monotowns are enhanced by other negative factors under Arctic conditions. These factors are extreme climate, remoteness from economic centers, imperfection of transport, engineering and social infrastructure. As the result, cost of living and costs of local budgets are increasing, social issues become more serious, business opportunities and innovational implementation have their limits [2, p. 58-59, 11, 12]. Most of monotowns located in the North of Russia and in the Arctic zone base on resources. One of the most serious developing risks for these towns is depletion of resources which causes industrial closure, and it will be fatal for the town. One of the consequences of these negative factors as well as an indicator of socioeconomic problems is the tendency of essential population reduction in most of monotowns located in the North of Russia and in the Arctic region. For example, population size in 18 towns situated in Russian Arctic and included in the Official List of Russian monotowns has decreased at 30% (~300 hundred people) in the period of market reforms since 1990 till 2013. An exception here is composed by monotowns of Yamal-Nenets autonomous district, core companies there are enterprises in oil and gas industry. High costs of oil and gas companies provide more or less better regional socioeconomic situation. You may find more detailed characteristics of modern socioeconomic situation, especially those in Russian Arctic monotowns, in the article published as the result of researches in 2013 [10]. Government policy regarding monotowns An important instrument of Russian government policy to overcome problems of monotowns was the scheme of financial support to realize investment plans given at competitive base. This instrument has been implemented within the framework of antirecession policy since 2009. Necessary condition for providing special-purpose federal resources was the Complex Investment Plan of monotowns modernization developed in accordance with methodical recommendation of Russian Ministry of Regional Development. Complex Investment Plan is the document of strategic planning as far as according to the recommendations it should cover the period in more than 10 years and include analyses of socioeconomic and financial situation in the town with using SWOT-analyses method, performance of targets and further development priorities as well as mechanism of their realization. Almost all northern and arctic monotowns in Russian Federation provided Complex Investment Plans in 2010- 2011 and satisfied one of the most conditions to get state support for their realization. Though state budget devoted funds to 50 Russian monotowns in 2010-2011 (35 towns in 2010, 15 towns in 2011), only 3 arctic settlings got the support, they are Kovdor and Revda in Murmansk region, Severodvinsk in Arkhangelsk region [10]. The conditions according to those government devoted funds to monotowns are reasonable and they base on the principals of strategic planning and management of its development. Despite this fact the organization of the process itself and practical realization of plans did not provide accomplishment of those principals in most cases. It can be explained by following circumstances. First of all, unexpected (without any preparations) character of government demands concerning the Complex Investment Plans for monotowns (especially for those 28 towns which were included in the list with the most serious problems, they had only 1 or 2 months). It is obvious that they would not provide appropriate implementation of the principals 30 октябрь 2014 № 2 (25) МурманшельфИнфо