 led to a significant reduction in spending on economic development and improving the welfare of the population (Povarova, 2015). Thus, the regional finance crisis had a negative impact both on the budget sector of the region and on the stability of the regional system as a whole.
Along with factors in the scientific literature, much attention is paid to tools to ensure the sustainability of the regional economy. In the context of global competition, clusters act as an effective tool for sustainable development (Akif, Vladyka, & Rashina, 2019). In recent decades, cluster initiatives have been widely used in economic policy both in Russia and in other countries. Within the framework of the cluster, through the deeper processing of raw materials, the production of products with higher added value is organized, and innovation activity is also activated. The synergistic effect of the interaction of the cluster members ensures the high competitiveness of the jointly produced product in both the domestic and foreign markets. The creation of territorial clusters is currently a widespread method for ensuring stable regional development in Russia. The necessary conditions for their creation exist in almost all regions (Glinskiy, Serga, & Chemezova, 2016).
The problem of using clusters as a tool for sustainable development lies in the fact that far from all the clusters declared in regional planning documents actually function and provide an increase in the performance of participants. At the same time, the state spends a rather large amount of financial resources on their support. In this regard, evaluating the effectiveness of clusters should be based both on an analysis of the dynamics of indicators of enterprises participating in the cluster and on assessing their contribution to the development of the economy and improving the quality of life in the region (Abrashkin, Pogodina, & Aleksahina, 2018).
Along with clusters, other types of network structures are also among the tools for sustainable development (Mingaleva, Sheresheva, & Oborin, 2017). A significant problem in ensuring the sustainability of the regional system is the low efficiency of using the potential of small towns and rural territories. In this regard, the development of network interaction of settlements of all levels should also be attributed to the number of tools to improve economic dynamics.
As a priority tool for ensuring the sustainable development of the region, it is necessary to consider increasing its investment attractiveness, which, in turn, is largely determined by the level of infrastructure development and the innovative activity of the region’s enterprises (Zinovyeva, Avdeeva, & Usova, 2017). Along with investment attractiveness, the creation of a favorable business climate should be considered as a factor in social stability and sustainable economic growth of territories. For this, it is necessary to reduce social, economic, and administrative barriers and create favorable conditions for the development of small businesses (Morkovina, 2016).
Based on the analysis, the following factors for the sustainable development of the regions can be distinguished: increasing the role of high-tech sectors, effective cooperation of the triad “industry – science – education”, innovative development of manufacturing industries, effective interaction of financial and real sectors of the economy. Thus, in the scientific literature, ensuring sustainable development of the regional economy is determined by the transition to a strategy of innovative development. Moreover, clusters act primarily as an effective tool for sustainable development. In addition, the development of infrastructure, including innovation, the creation of network structures of settlements of various levels, and the creation of a favorable investment and business climate, are among the instruments.
In the program documents of the constituent entities of the Federation, sustainable development is also associated with the transition to an innovative model of the economy. Thus, the Strategy for Economic and Social Development of St. Petersburg for the period until 2030 proclaims the need to create a full-fledged infrastructure to support innovation by developing existing and creating new technology transfer centers, business incubators, engineering centers, technology parks, industrial parks that have both and universal specialization. The Strategy of the Leningrad Region as a condition for sustainable development considers the long-term policy of innovative development of the region. In the Strategy of the Novgorod Region, science and innovation policy is considered as part of the mechanism for implementing the Strategy. A similar situation exists in other regions.
At the next stage, we will analyze the impact of the identified factors on the stability of the regional economies. Stability in the first stage was assessed by the dynamics of the GRP indicator. The results of the analysis of the stability of the economy of the regions of the CFD and the NWFD in the conditions of the economic crisis of 2014-2016 are presented in Table 01, where they are grouped by GRP and innovation activity indicators. In general, we can state that, based on the dynamics of the GRP, the economy of most of the 28 regions analyzed showed the necessary level of stability in a crisis. In twelve regions over the three years of the crisis, the economy grew by more than 5%, i.e. they have a fairly high level of stability. The average level of stability was shown by 8 regions, and 8 regions had a low level. Thus, from the point of view of GRP dynamics, most of the regions of the CFD and the NWFD have a fairly stable economy.
As shown by the analysis of scientific literature and planning documents of the constituent entities of the Federation, the implementation of an innovative strategy is considered as the main factor in the sustainability of the regional economy. The effectiveness of this strategy can be estimated by the Table 01 to the grouping of the regions of the CFD and the NWFD according to the indicators “GRP physical volume index” and “volume of innovative goods, work, services as a percentage of the total volume of goods shipped, work performed, services” for the period 2014-2016. All analyzed regions have rather low rates of innovation. The Vologda region has a maximum value of the indicator “volume of innovative goods” – 14.8%, in a number of regions this indicator is less than 1%. Moreover, most regions declare the need for economic development according to the innovative scenario in program documents. In general, we can state that regions with relatively high indicators of innovation activity have a fairly stable economy.
Qualitative analysis of the data presented in Table 01 does not allow to reveal the presence of a significant relationship between indicators of innovation activity and GRP dynamics. Quantitative analysis confirms this hypothesis. The correlation coefficient between the indicators is 0.36, i.e. dependence is positive and weak. However, we can talk about a slight increase in the impact of the level of innovative activity on the stability of the regional economies.
In the scientific literature, as well as in program documents, as priority instruments for implementing an innovative strategy and ensuring sustainable development, priority is given to clusters. So, in the strategy of the Leningrad region, it is noted that 11 cluster initiatives are being implemented in the region. Among the priority areas are mechanical engineering, automotive, shipbuilding, chemical and petrochemical production, timber processing and pulp and paper production, agriculture, etc. Much attention is also paid to cluster development in the Kaluga region. At the same time, these regions have a low value of the indicator of innovation activity. Currently, cluster initiatives in the regions to some extent serve as tools for the modernization of traditional sectors, which positively affects the sustainability of the economy. Moreover, in conditions of low innovative activity of the Russian economy, they cannot become an effective tool for implementing an innovative strategy.
Thus, the transition to an innovative development strategy should be considered as a promising direction for the sustainable development of regional economies. Moreover, improvement of investment attractiveness should be highlighted as an urgent problem. During the crisis of 2014-2016. regions showed different dynamics of investments. As noted above, in St. Petersburg, investments increased by almost 15%, and in the Ivanovo region fell by almost 45%. Moreover, in all models of economic growth, the dynamics of investments is the main factor determining the dynamics of GRP. In addition, investments are closely linked to innovation. Thus, the level of investment activity should be considered as a long-term factor in the sustainable development of regional economies. To assess the impact of the factor of investment activity on sustainability, we will group the regions according to GRP indices and investments in fixed assets (see Table 02 ).
A qualitative analysis of the data presented in Table 02 allows us to conclude that the level of investment activity significantly affects the GRP dynamics and, accordingly, the stability of the region’s economy. Quantitative analysis confirms this conclusion. The correlation coefficient between the indicators is 0.62.
Based on the analysis, we can identify the following levels of regional stability. The regions with high GRP and investment dynamics, as well as a high and medium level of innovation activity have a high level of sustainability. This group includes the following regions: Kursk, Tula, Voronezh, Lipetsk and Vologda regions, as well as St. Petersburg and Moscow. In the group with an average level of sustainability, we included regions with positive GRP dynamics and a slight drop in investment: Novgorod, Belgorod, Bryansk, Kaliningrad and Murmansk regions. The remaining regions during the crisis showed both a decrease in GRP and a significant reduction in investment activity. Based on this, we attributed them to the group with a low level of stability. You can also select a group with promising sustainability. It should include regions in which during the crisis the GRP decreased. At the same time, investments should have positive dynamics, and innovations should be high and medium level. However, in the Central Federal District and NWFD there are no regions with such indicators.
The analysis showed that in the scientific literature, as well as in the program documents of the constituent entities of the Federation, sustainable development is associated with the transition to an innovative model of economic development. As a tool for ensuring sustainable development, it is recommended that, first of all, cluster initiatives be implemented