home Debit cards Communal model of municipal economy in foreign practice. Basic models and methods of municipal economy management. The municipal rent model of the municipal economy provides for ...

Communal model of municipal economy in foreign practice. Basic models and methods of municipal economy management. The municipal rent model of the municipal economy provides for ...

The structure of the municipal economy (its elements) includes:

Municipal enterprises whose activities are directed and subordinated to the interests of the population of the Moscow Region;

The results of the activities of the MP (profit or specific goods and services) are directed to meet public needs;

Other enterprises and institutions whose activities are partly related to the implementation of the public interests of the population. These enterprises are forced to participate in the implementation of public interests by virtue of normative (in the form of obligations imposed by law) or public (voluntary) coercion;

The subject coordinating the activities of these heterogeneous entities in the interests of the population of municipal government.

Based on this analysis, the main feature by which the elements of the municipal economy can be classified is the role (and place) of this or that element in the implementation of social needs.

And from this point of view, the following elements stand out:

Municipal enterprises (since their activities are completely subordinated to the interests of the population of the municipality);

Other enterprises and institutions whose activities are partly related to the implementation of the public interests of the population of municipalities;

Organs local government.

Municipal enterprises, being by their nature a social phenomenon, direct all their results, whether it be profit or specific goods and services, to public needs. Other enterprises and institutions are forced to participate in the implementation of public interests by virtue of normative (in the form of obligations imposed on them in the normative or legislative order) or public (voluntary in form) coercion.

The third group, designated in our classification, performs a special function - the function of regulating the activities of the two previous groups in the interests of the population of the municipality.

The value of this classification is that it allows, based on the allocation of these three groups, to determine not only the role and place of each of them in resolving issues of local importance, but also, depending on this, the goals of the activity of these elements in the process of managing the municipal economy, taking into account their features. .

Thus, this classification clearly shows that when building relations between the population of a municipality and economic entities on issues of local importance, it is most beneficial to have relations with municipal enterprises, since they not only sell goods and services to the population, but also the profit received as a result from their activities, is also the property of this local community. Therefore, a well-functioning municipal enterprise is always more profitable for the municipal economy.

From the point of view of what role certain elements play in resolving issues of local importance, several forms of municipal economy can be distinguished, primarily on the basis of the growing role of their own economic activity.

The communal model of the municipal economy is characterized by the fact that the brunt of the costs for the implementation of public interests and needs are borne by the inhabitants of the municipality (communes, communities), and the main resource is the taxes of the population. The main element in this system is the local self-government body, which carries out both the accumulation of resources and their expenditure. This model is the most acceptable and exists in the most “prosperous” countries of Europe, where the rights of local governments to conduct economic activities are limited. The insufficiency of resources to fulfill the tasks assigned to local self-government is compensated by the state.

The communal-rental model of the municipal economy, in comparison with the previous one, differs in that it provides for the participation of local governments in the use of the resources of the territory and in its development through the provision of limited rights in financial and credit activities and the right of resource rent. That is, taxes from the population are supplemented by the possibility of taxing the producer of products and services on the territory of the municipality.

The municipal-rental model of the municipal economy implies that the main burden for serving the interests of the population and solving local issues is borne by local governments, for which they are given the opportunity to become a full-fledged economic entity on their territory.

Work description

The purpose of this term paper– comprehensively describe the activities of municipal farms and their main economic models. Based on the goal, the following tasks were set:

1.analyze the legislative and economic component of the activities of municipal farms;
2.characterize the main ways of managing the municipal economy;
3.analyze the advantages and disadvantages of various models of the municipal economy

Introduction ................................................... ................................................. ...........3

Chapter 1. Legislative support for the activities of the municipal economy ........................................................ ................................................. .......5

§one. municipal government and municipal management........5

§2. The main types of municipalities in Russia .............................. 9

§3. Limits of competence of municipal self-government bodies..14

Chapter 2 general characteristics municipal economy..............................22

§one. Subjects and objects of the municipal economy....................................22

§2. The structure and infrastructure of the municipal economy .................25

§3. Municipal administration and municipal economy in the system of public relations.................................................................. .........................34

Chapter 3 Economic activity municipal authorities .................................................................. ...............................................42

§one. Municipal economic policy...............................................42

§2. The main methods of conducting municipal economy..............................47

§3. General characteristics of the resources of the municipal economy .......... 53

§four. The budget of the municipal economy .................................................... .....55

Conclusion................................................. ................................................. ........60

List of references .............................................................................. ................

The needs of the municipality for property and financial resources are interdependent. This is explained by the fact that objects of municipal property can be budget-filling (bringing revenues to the budget) and budget-absorbing (not generating revenues to the budget or requiring budget funds for their maintenance in an amount exceeding the income received). So, the municipal non-residential premises, leased out, is a budget-filling object. Most of the objects of the social sphere are budget-absorbing. For example, fees in a kindergarten compensate for only a part of the cost of maintaining a child, while the bulk of the costs are covered from the local budget. A municipal enterprise in different situations can be both budget-filling and budget-absorbing. Since the municipality, on the one hand, is a non-profit organization, it does not aim to make a profit. On the other hand, he must have a balanced budget. Therefore, the key task of the municipal economic policy consists in optimizing the relationship between the volume of budgetary services and the need for property and financial resources. From these positions in foreign practice, three models of the municipal economy and sources of its financing are distinguished.

1. Communal. Residents themselves pay suppliers for the municipal services they consume individually, including socially significant ones, and the costs of financing public services are borne in the form of taxes. The local self-government body carries out only accumulation financial resources for public needs and spending them through the municipal order system. The municipality is not involved in economic activity and has no property that generates income, and the need for property that requires costs for their maintenance, and for financial resources is minimal. competitive market municipal services is so developed that the task of the municipal government is only to identify the best providers in terms of price and quality indicators. The model is typical for economically developed countries with a high standard of living.

2. The municipal rent differs from the previous one in that it provides for the participation of local governments not only in the distribution of municipal orders for public services, but also in the use of the economic resources of the territory (land and real estate) and the provision of certain budgetary services (mainly social) on the basis of municipal property. The higher need of the municipality for financial resources in this model is ensured by the fact that taxes from the population and producers, as well as payments for services, are supplemented by rent payments for the use of municipal property, including land ownership.

3. Municipal-rental is characterized by the fact that the main burden in resolving issues of life support for the population is borne not by the residents themselves, but by local governments. To do this, their sources of income should be not only taxes and rent payments, but also large incomes from economic activities. municipal enterprises and, therefore, they should become a full-fledged economic entity on their territory. The founder of Russian municipal science, L. Velikhov, called this model municipal socialism. The idea is that local self-government bodies should basically independently provide financial resources for their social needs through effective economic activity.

The approach that exists in modern Russia is something in between the second and third models. On the one hand, the low solvency and mentality of the population force the municipal authorities to provide residents with many partially paid or not paid services, which is typical for the municipal rental model. On the other hand, municipal enterprises (more on this in Section 6.4) are for the most part not sources of income, but consumers of budgetary funds. This imbalance is due to an excess of municipally owned property, especially social facilities that require large maintenance costs, as well as a chronic shortage of financial resources to cover the costs of local budgets.

Let us consider the question of the structure of the municipal economy and carry out some classification of the connections that arise within the municipal economy between its elements. First of all, it is necessary to find out what the elements of the municipal economy are, and on what basis we can classify them. The methodology proposed in defining the very concept of “municipal economy” offers an approach based on the fact that:

1. A municipal economy is a set of enterprises and institutions operating on the territory of a municipality.
2. The activities carried out by these enterprises and institutions are aimed at satisfying the public interest.
3. Since activities are carried out by subjects of this activity that are heterogeneous in nature, a subject coordinating their activities is also necessary.

Federal authorities Regional authorities MUNICIPALITY Structure of the municipal economy Households Economic entities Representative bodies Issues of local importance Direct support for the life of the municipality Realization of economic interests Solving problems of an inter-settlement nature City markets Other markets Capital market Labor market Housing market. The system of the municipal economy Based on this analysis, the main feature by which we can classify the elements of the municipal economy is the role and place of this or that element in the implementation of social needs. And from this point of view, we can highlight the following elements:

*municipal enterprises (since their activities are completely subordinated to the interests of the population of the municipality);
* other enterprises and institutions whose activities are partly related to the implementation of formations;
*local governments.

The role of each of these elements is different. Municipal enterprises, being by their nature a social phenomenon, direct all their results, whether it be profit or specific goods and services, to public needs. Other enterprises and institutions are forced to participate in the implementation of public interests by virtue of normative (in the form of obligations imposed on them in the normative or legislative order) or public (voluntary in form) coercion. The third group, designated in our classification, performs a special function - the function of regulating the activities of the two previous groups in the interests of the population of the municipality. The value of this classification is that it allows, based on the allocation of these three groups, to determine not only the role and place of each of them in solving issues of local importance, but also, depending on this, the purpose of the activity of these elements in the process of managing the municipal economy, taking into account their features. Thus, this classification clearly shows that when building relations between the population of a municipality and business entities on issues of local importance, it is most beneficial to have relations with municipal enterprises, since they not only sell goods and services to the population, but also the profit received as a result of their activities is also the property of that local community. Therefore, a well-functioning municipal enterprise is, in principle, always more profitable for the municipal economy. However, this is only a theoretical model, since such a state of municipal enterprises is the result of a rather long and complex work. So, for the municipalities of pre-revolutionary Russia, the public interests of the municipal population took almost fifty years of reforms in order for the economic activity of the municipalities to begin to bring up to fifty percent of the revenue side of the budgets. Therefore, from the point of view of what role certain elements of the municipal economy play in resolving issues of local importance, we can distinguish several types of municipal economy, primarily on the basis of the growing role of their own economic activity. Let us now consider the models of management of the municipal economy. There are the following models of management of the municipal economy: * Communal model of the municipal economy;

* Communal rental model of the municipal economy;
* Municipal rent model of the municipal economy.
1. Communal model of the municipal economy. It is characterized by the fact that the brunt of the costs for the implementation of public interests and needs are borne by the residents of the municipality themselves (communes, communities) and the main resource is taxes on the population. The main element in this system is the local self-government body, which carries out both the accumulation of resources and their expenditure. This model is the most acceptable and exists in the most “prosperous” countries of Europe, where the rights of local governments to conduct economic activities are limited. The insufficiency of resources to fulfill the tasks assigned to local self-government is compensated by the state.
2. Communal rental model of the municipal economy. This model differs from the previous one in that it provides for the participation of local governments in the use of the resources of the territory and in its development through the provision of limited rights in financial and credit activities and the right of resource rent. That is, taxes from the population are supplemented by the possibility of taxing the producer of education. products and services on the territory of the municipal
3. Municipal rent model of the municipal economy. This model implies that the main burden of serving the interests of the population and addressing issues of local importance is borne by local governments, for which they are given the opportunity to become a full-fledged economic entity on their territory. Of course, this or that model does not exist in its pure form, but the role and place of this or that element in different countries seriously differ from each other. What determines the existence of a particular model? From a huge number of factors, the main of which are certainly:
1. The scope of competence of local governments, defined by law.
2. The presence and nature of the main resources of the territory.
3. Availability of qualified personnel in local governments and municipal enterprises.
4. Taxability of the population. Depending on these factors, a specific type of municipal economy is formed. It should be noted that the existence of one or another model of the municipal economy depends on the resources of the territory (material, financial, personnel); from the collection of taxes and from the competence of LSG bodies. So, for example, the communal model exists in the most prosperous countries of Western Europe, but in Russia, it is practically not used anywhere, on the contrary, Russian LSGs claim, and often unreasonably, to implement the municipal rental model.

As shown above, the municipal economy consists of various economic entities, whose activities are determined and coordinated by the relevant local government. Based on this, three elements can be distinguished in the structure of the municipal economy:

1) local self-government bodies that carry out regulatory and economic regulation activities of economic entities on the territory of the municipality, while the purpose of such regulation is to meet the collective needs of the population of this territory;
2) enterprises, institutions and organizations that are in municipal ownership. Relations with local governments of these economic entities are regulated by Art. 31 of the Law "On general principles... ". Local self-government bodies determine the goals, conditions and procedure for their activities; regulate prices and tariffs for their products, approve their charters, appoint and dismiss their leaders;
3) enterprises, institutions and organizations that are not in municipal ownership. Relationships with local self-government bodies of these economic entities are regulated by Art. 32, 33 of the Law "On General Principles ...". These articles define the contractual nature of the relationship, give the right to local governments to coordinate the activities of these entities in the integrated socio-economic development of the territory of the municipality, and in certain cases establish restrictions on their activities.

All world experience shows that it is not municipal enterprises that work most efficiently, but enterprises located in private property Therefore, it is advisable to interest them in the production of goods and services aimed at meeting the social needs of the population of a given territory. Local self-government bodies can do this with the help of a municipal order, benefits provided to such enterprises.

The municipal order, being the most effective way of interaction between local governments and enterprises that are not in municipal ownership, is now becoming more widespread. Various subjects of the federation adopt their own laws regulating this issue. In St. Petersburg, for example, a law “On the Order of St. Petersburg” was adopted, although formally St. Petersburg is a subject Russian Federation, so that, strictly speaking, the law regulates the introduction of a state order, but, in fact, we are talking about a real municipal order if the municipality is a large city. The goals of this law are to ensure the efficient use of city budget funds and support for the production of goods, works and services by St. Petersburg organizations. The main principles for the formation, placement and execution of the order of St. Petersburg are the support of competitive industries (the order is placed according to the results of the competition) and the creation of favorable conditions for their development in the city, ensuring the priority of St. Petersburg manufacturers (by providing benefits and quotas).

Consider now the types of municipal economy: L.A. Velikhov identifies four models of the municipal economy:

- municipalization;
- municipal-contracting and municipal-rental models;
- municipal concession;
- concession.

These models differ in the degree of intervention of the local government in the economic activity of the enterprise. The maximum intervention is carried out during municipalization, when the local government essentially becomes the owner of the enterprise, the minimum intervention involves a concession, when the local government, on contractual terms, allows a private person to manage the enterprise. It should be borne in mind that Velikhov's book was published in 1928, and some of its provisions are still outdated.

Currently, the following types of municipal economy are being implemented:

1. Municipal rental model, in which local governments bear the main burden of resolving issues of local importance and are a full-fledged economic entity on the territory of the municipality (this model corresponds to municipalization in the classification of L.A. Velikhov).
2. The communal rent model, in which the revenues of local governments are made up of taxes collected from residents of the municipality and, in addition, local governments can impose taxes (in the form of resource rent, for example) on economic entities.
3. The communal model, in which the revenues of local governments are made up of taxes from residents of the municipality. Economic activity here is carried out mainly by private enterprises (this model is closest to the concession in the classification of L.A. Velikhov).

It should be noted that the existence of one or another type of municipal economy depends on the resources of the territory (material, financial, personnel); from the collection of taxes and from the competence of local governments. So, for example, the communal model exists in the most prosperous countries of Western Europe, but in Russia, it is practically not used anywhere, on the contrary, Russian local governments claim, and often unreasonably, to implement the municipal rental model.

Traditionally, resources are understood as a certain set of capabilities of a particular territory. In relation to economic relations, resources, as a rule, are understood as material and intangible indicators of the territory that can be used in economic activities. First of all, this concept includes natural resources (land, bowels, etc.). Usually, material resources also include production potential, production facilities located in a given territory.

The development of the territory is largely determined by the availability of material resources, since the effectiveness of investments invested in the region depends on them, they determine the structure of production activities and the well-being of the population. But, despite the exceptional importance for the conduct of economic activity of the availability of resources, the activity itself is impossible without the main resource - the personnel potential of the territory.

Regional development № 2 2014

MODELS OF MUNICIPAL ECONOMY

Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor

Samara State University of Economics E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

Key words: municipal economy, local governments, municipality, communal model, communal rent model, municipal rent model.

Approaches on the permissible degree of participation of local governments in economic activity are considered. The choice of the optimal economic model for Russia for a municipal entity is substantiated.

MODEL MUNICIPAL SERVICES

Candidate of Economics, Associate Professor

Samara State University of Economics [email protected]; [email protected]

Keywords: Municipal service, local governments, municipality, utility model, utility-annuity model, municipal-annuity model.

Approaches are risen on the permissible extent of participation of local governments in economic activity. The choice of the optimum for the Russian economic model for the municipality.

In Russia, municipalities are making significant efforts to ensure that, despite the great difficulties of the institutional, financial, material, and organizational plan, they successfully solve the problems of providing life support services to the population.

The issue of the permissible degree of participation of local governments in economic activities and, as a result, the necessary composition of municipal property is one of the key issues in determining the ways for the further development of local government in Russia. In recent years, this problem has been actively discussed in the municipal community; among the participants in the discussion one can note A.G. Voronin, R.V. Babun, V. A. Lapin, E. Markvart, A. N. Shirokov, and others. The most complete solution to this problem is argued by E. Markvart, supported by A. N. Shirokov.

E. Markvart formulates two necessary conditions, with the simultaneous presence of which municipalities can only create their own economic entities (organizations)1:

1) the activity of these entities is necessary to ensure the normal life of the population and corresponds to the tasks and powers of local self-government;

2) due to objective reasons, the corresponding activity is not carried out and cannot be carried out by other economic entities.

The remaining fundamental problems on this issue encourage us to formulate constructive proposals for its solution.

The extreme approaches of the parties are as follows:

First approach. Economic activity municipalities should be reduced

to a minimum of functions, to do without the performance of which, for objective reasons, is impossible or clearly irrational. The municipality is a non-profit organization and does not have to earn anything on its own. Its task is to be a local government body, to accumulate taxes in its budget, the list of which is established by the state, and to issue municipal orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for municipal needs by business entities and municipal assignments for non-profit organizations at the expense of these funds. Accordingly, the composition of municipal property should also be minimal and limited to a closed list of non-commercial property. Lands of cities, except land plots, on which objects of state and municipal property are located, must be in private ownership. Municipal enterprises (with the exception of some special cases) should not be.

Second approach. The municipality must be an active economic entity - a municipal corporation, possess all the property necessary for this, including land and local natural resources, have a complex of efficiently operating municipal enterprises and independently earn money for their existence, which does not exclude support from the state.

Between the presented extreme points of view, there is a wide range of intermediate views: something is possible, but something is not. It is obvious that the degree of participation of municipal authorities in economic activity, the composition of municipal property, sources of income and the volume of expenditure obligations (powers) of local budgets are inextricably linked.

Depending on the volume of own economic activity and on the role of certain elements of the municipal economy in modern world A.G. Voronin distinguishes three models of the municipal economy: communal, communal-rental

model and municipal rent model2.

The communal model is characterized by the fact that the main burden of the cost of satisfying

the creation of the needs of municipalities are the inhabitants themselves. Authorities carry out the process of accumulation and distribution of financial resources for the public needs of the territory. The municipality does not take part in economic activities and does not have its own income-generating property, therefore, the need for financial resources is minimal. Taxes are the main source of resources. The disadvantage of this model is that the resources for solving the problems of the municipality are replenished by the state. In modern Russia, this approach has not yet received its development.

The communal rental model differs from the communal model in that local governments not only distribute municipal orders for public services, but also provide residents with free or partially paid services, most often social ones. The high demand of the municipality for cash is replenished by taxes from the population and producers and is supplemented by rent payments. For this, the main economic resources of the territory - land and real estate objects - are transferred to municipal ownership. But the municipality does not participate in direct economic activity. Municipal enterprises, as in the communal model, should not be.

Under the municipal rental model, the management of the municipal economy (serving the population and solving local problems) is entrusted to local authorities, since they are a full-fledged economic entity of the municipality. Significant funds are spent on the life support of the population, therefore, large incomes from the economic activities of municipal enterprises, as well as taxes and rent payments, are needed as sources of income.

The communal model corresponds to the first of the above approaches and is really possible only in an economically developed countries with a high standard of living.

The municipal rent model corresponds to the second approach. Utilities

Regional Development No. 2 2014

the rental model occupies an intermediate position.

Of course, none of the listed models can exist in its pure form, and in real life some confusion is inevitable.

In our country, in the practice of managing the municipal economy, none of the models is used in its pure form, but one of its elements is taken. Thus, the situation taking place in modern Russia is a combination of diametrically opposed models. The choice of one or another model depends on a number of factors: on the scope of competences of local authorities, determined by the legislation of the country, on the availability and nature of the main resources.

On the one hand, in Russian municipalities, the situation is such that, due to low solvency, the population is forcing the municipality to provide a large number of services, paid in part or in full, which indicates the presence of objects of social importance that are in municipal ownership and require financial financing3.

On the other hand, the state has proclaimed a policy of limiting the economic activity of municipalities and a sharp reduction in the composition of municipal property that can generate income, which is typical for the communal model. The municipal enterprises that remain in the cities are for the most part not sources of income, but rather recipients of budgetary funds through a system of subsidies; many of them have the status of state-owned (unprofitable) enterprises. Enterprises of water supply, heat supply, urban transport, removal and processing of household waste, and others may well be normal profitable enterprises and bring income to the city treasury, but this would require setting higher tariffs for their services that are unacceptable to the population. As a result of this imbalance between sources of income and spending commitments there was a chronic deficit of local budgets. Coating 70

This deficit is carried out both through subsidies from higher budgets and through direct support for socially important areas of municipal activity through priority national projects and various targeted federal and regional programs.

To solve the existing problems in the development of the municipal economy of Russia, the following measures seem appropriate:

♦ improving the management of municipal property through the effective operation of municipal unitary enterprises;

♦ Structural and quantitative optimization of municipal enterprises (the necessary level of control of local governments over certain sectors of the municipal economy);

♦ increasing the quantity and quality of municipal services while maintaining the volume of resources;

♦ sufficiency of own financial resources and their proportionality to the granted powers;

♦ receipt of at least part of the funds in local budget at the expense local fees and taxes;

♦ development and use of the public-private partnership mechanism4.

For the successful development of the municipal economy of Russia on present stage the most acceptable would be a combination of elements of the communal-rental and municipal-rental models of the municipal economy, which is clearly shown in the figure.

♦ clearly link the areas of economic activity of municipalities with the legislatively fixed subjects of local self-government and are gradually exempted from performing tasks in the economic sphere that are unusual for public authorities, including through the restructuring, reorganization and privatization of municipal enterprises that have

State and municipal administration

Provision and consumption of certain municipal services

Suppliers

Population Efficient service to the population Municipal

Enterprise financing costs

Taxes, rent payments for public needs

LSG bodies

Accumulation and distribution of financial resources for public needs through the municipal order system

Rice. Proposed model of municipal economy in Russia

objects of activity do not correspond to the tasks of local self-government;

♦ implement as widely as possible the mechanisms for the formation and competitive placement of municipal orders in housing, communal, transport and other areas;

♦ actively involve non-profit organizations (municipal institutions, charitable and other non-profit organizations) in the provision of services to the population, which at this stage of development cannot be self-sustaining ( social protection, education, etc.);

♦ actively involve private enterprises and entrepreneurs, enterprises of other non-municipal forms of ownership in the provision of services to the population that fall under the jurisdiction of local self-government;

♦ receive income from the economic activities of municipal enterprises;

♦ attract to the municipal economy as internal (at the expense of

municipal budgets and funds received by enterprises for services rendered to the population), and external investments (primarily private - both Russian and foreign);

♦ taxes from the population are supplemented by the possibility of taxation of the producer of products and services on the territory of the municipality. one

1 Markvart E. Features of the creation of municipal economic companies // Local law. - 2011. - No. 3. - S. 21-32.

2 Voronin A.G. Municipal economy and management: problems of theory and practice. - M., 2002. - S.41-42.

3 Babun R. Economic activity of municipalities and composition of municipal property // municipal economy. - 2009. - No. 3. -S. 46-47.

4 Polyanskova N.V., Chudilin G.I. Integral statistical typology of municipal districts of the Samara region in terms of socio-ecological and economic development and sustainability // Vopr. statistics. - 2012. - No. 10. - S. 35-41.