Foreign direct investment in the Russian economy

). R ecently the rating of oil and gas extraction and export-oriented areas rises. D istribution of regions of Russia on degree of risk is characterized by contrast. I t is characteristic that from the point of view of investment risk all regions are initially equal, and any, even the small region, can get to number of the least risky. T he majority of the least risk regions are concentrated in almost continuous narrow strip from St.

P etersburg to Yekaterinburg (Moscow, Tatarstan, Lipetsk, Rostov areas etc.) while the majority of the most risk regions occupy almost all Eastern Siberia and the Far East. A s a whole the economic development of the Russian regions is characterized by deepening of interregional contrasts and proceeding concentration of activity of foreign investors in limited number of most dynamically developing and stable territorial subjects of the Russian Federation.

T he policy pursued by local administration concerning foreign investments, first of all in aspects of guarantees of safety of investments, insurance, etc. has considerable impact on formation of interests of foreign investors. R

egional priorities of foreign countries in Russia are caused by two factors. T he first factor is concrete placement of sales markets, resources, the branches of production which are of interest from the point of view of receiving profit. T he second one is geographical and ethno cultural proximity to certain Russian regions. F

or many countries territorial interests in Russia are formed under the influence of a certain combination of these two factors. I n most general view distribution of interests of the countries investors can be presented as follows. N eighboring countries seek for expansion of economic cooperation with near Russian regions. W

hen forming territorial zones of interests of the countries which don’t have the direct neighborhood with Russia, the production and marketing factor prevails. T he priorities of the European countries are in the European part of Russia, in the Urals and in Western Siberia, and Pacific Rim countries — in the Far East and in Eastern Siberia. I nterests of the USA cover all these regions. I t should be noted that almost all regions of the Russian Federation cooperate with limited number of the countries. CONCLUSIONSThe problem of our paper is very difficult and it’s necessary to investigate this topic, look for new approaches and indices in order to evaluate the role and efficiency of FDI on the host countries. Acting as the catalyst of economic growth, FDI can promote implementation of progressive structural shifts, creation of new industries, strengthening of positions of national producers on the world markets. I

n the conditions of economic crises their value repeatedly increases that was confirmed with world economic practice. A ctive and complex use of the foreign capitals played, as we know, an important role in post-war recovery of Western Europe and Japan, and also in overcoming of backwardness and rapid growth of a number of NIS (Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea). T hus, attraction and increase of efficiency of FDI in national economy is a paramount problem of any state. A

s a whole FDI render positive, but insufficient influence on economic development of the Russian Federation. FDI stimulate development of economy of Russia, improve branch structure of production, and influence internal investment activity. H

owever these processes proceed very slowly and in insignificant scales. T he analysis shows that influence of FDI on social, innovative and budgetary spheres of Russia is also insignificant. W ith regret it should be noted that FDI are directed not on modernization and increase of competitiveness of the country, but on enrichment of foreign and domestic investors (reinvesting the means from offshore harbors) at the expense of operation of resources of domestic market and extracting branches. REFERANCESAmin S. T he Implosion of Contemporary Capitalism: Monthly Review Press, 2013Balazkii E.

T he foreign business and its influence on the home country economies // The world economy and the international relations. 1999. # 6. Pp. 90−91.Balatskii E., Pavlichenko R. F

oreign sector in Russian economy // The world economy and the international relations. 2001. # 5. Pp. 47−54.Blomstrom M., Sjoholm F. T

echnology transfer and spillovers: Does local participation with multinationals matter? E uropean Economic Review. Vol.

43. P p. 915−923, 1999. Dunning J.H. The Eclectic paradigm in international production. T

he Nature of the Transnational Firm. L ondon, 1991. Ellworth P.T. The International Economy. L ondon, 1969. F eygin G.

F. R egularities of globalization and development of national economies: Thesis of the Dr. of Economic Science. — S t. P etersburg. 2009. Fischer P.

D irect foreign investments for Russia: strategy of revival of the industry. -M: F inance and statistics, 1999. F

ishlow A. C ontending with Capital Flows: What is Different about the 1990s?" with Barry Eichengreen in Capital Flows and Financial Crises, editor Miles Kahler (Cornell 1998) Kadochnikov S. F oreign direct investments: microeconomic analysis of effects of welfare.

S t. P etersburg: Economic school, 2002. Konings J. T he effect of Direct Foreign Investment on Domestic Firms: Evidence from Firm Level Panel Data in Emerging Economies. W orking Paper, LICOS, Centre for Transition Economics and Economics Department Catholic University of Leuven, 1999.LukyanovaA.Yu.

P roblems of innovative development of Russia // Topical issues of economy and management: materials of the international scientific conference, M: RIOR, 2011: URL: www.moluch.ruOkamoto Y., Sjoholm F. FDI and the Dynamics of Productivity: Microeconomic Evidence, Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance No. 348, December 1999. Porter M. C ompetitive Advantage of Nations.

N.Y.: F ree Press, 1990Prebish P. T he economic development of Latin America and its principal problems.

N.Y.: Lake Success, 1950. Research of investment appeal of Russia 2013: Ernst&Young: URL:

http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/Ras2013;rus/$FILE/Ras2013;rus.pdf (address date: 16.

04.2014) Rosstat: URL: www.gks.ru (address date: 06.

05.2014)The report «About increase of investment appeal of territorial subjects of the Russian Federation and business creating favorable conditions. — M: State Council of the Russian Federation, 2012. World Bank: URL:

http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=557 (address date: 03.

05.2014)World Investment Report 2013: Global Value Chains: Investment and Trade for Development // UNCTAD, 2013: URL: www.unctad.org (address date: 20.

03.2014)URL:

http://bdg.by/analytics/694.html (address date: 26.

04.2014)URL:

http://www.euromoney.com/Article/3 330 053/Euromoney-Country-Risk-Survey-results-Q1−2014;Confidence.html (address date: 30.

04.2014) (address date: 13.

05.2014)URL:

http://lenta.ru/news/2013/04/24/eiu (address date: 12.

05.2014)URL:

http://raexpert.ru/ratings/regions/2013/att1/att1−3/ (address date: 06.

05.2014)URL:

http://russian.doingbusiness.org/Rankings (address date: 30.

04.2014)URL:

http://www.ra-national.ru/uploads/rus/files/analytic/file_review/14.pdf (address date: 26.

04.2014)URL:

http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/content.aspx?page=GII-Home (address date: 26.

04.2014)VOCABULARYDevelopment — развитие. Foreign Direct Investments (FDI)-прямыеиностранныеинвестиции.Greenfield — «гринфилд» (инвестиции с нуля, в развитие новых производств).Hostcountryeconomies — страна-реципиент (страна, принимающая инвестиции).Influence — влияние. To estimate — оценить.