Economic resilience of industrial regions: The innovative aspect

   Aim. The authors identify industrial regions with a hereditary predisposition to innovative sovereignization, which can ensure their economic resilience.
   Tasks. The author substantiates the correlation between economic resilience and innovative sovereignization of industrial regions; determines the regional prerequisites for innovative sovereignization; assesses the predisposition of industrial regions to the growth of innovative sovereignization that would ensure the resilience of the national economy.
   Methods. This study uses the method of calculating Frobenius norms to determine the current economic predisposition of industrial regions to innovative sovereignization and Markov chain modeling to assess the expected economic predisposition. Consistent application of these methods makes it possible to model the behavior of regions associated with the expansion of innovation activity on the domestic technology base.
   Results. The prerequisites reflecting favorable conditions for the economic resilience of industrial regions in the context of enhancing their innovative sovereignization are revealed.
   Conclusions. Some industrial regions have already developed favorable economic conditions for innovative sovereignization, while in others they are only emerging. This means that economic resilience of the national economy at the regional level can be achieved through the implementation of two types of strategies that make allowance for this heredity: stimulating accelerated innovative development of industrial economies on the domestic scientific basis and ensuring smooth innovative development of regions with a gradual decrease in the share of foreign technologies. The first type of strategy can be recommended for the city of Moscow, the Republic of Tatarstan, as well as Samara, Sverdlovsk, and Chelyabinsk regions. The second type of strategy will be appropriate for the city of St. Petersburg as well as Moscow, Tomsk, Nizhny Novgorod, Novosibirsk, Kaluga, and Perm regions.

1. Final NAEC synthesis: New approaches to economic challenges. Paris: OECD; 2015. 127 p. URL: https://www.oecd.org/naec/Final-NAEC-Synthesis-Report-CMIN2015-2.pdf (accessed on 20. 10. 2022).

2. Soanes C., Stevenson A., eds. Oxford dictionary of English. 3rd revised ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010. 2112 p.

3. Block J. H., Block J. The role of ego-control and ego-resiliency in the organization of behavior. In: Collins W. A., ed. Development of cognition, affect and social relations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.; 1980: 39-101. (The Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology. Vol. 13).

4. Valieva F. I. Resilience as a factor of social and professional adaptation. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya 12: Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya. Pedagogika = Vestnik of Saint-Petersburg University. Series 12: Psychology. Sociology. Pedagogy. 2014; (2): 39-50. (In Russ.).

5. Sameroff A., Gutman L. M., Peck S. C. Adaptation among youth facing multiple risks: Prospective research findings. In: Luthar S. S., ed. Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2003: 364-391.

6. Resilience systems analysis: Learning and recommendations report. Paris: OECD; 2017. 90 p. URL: https://www.oecd.org/dac/conflict-fragility-resilience/docs/SwedenLearning_Recommendationsreport.pdf (accessed on 20. 10. 2022).

7. Rogova V. A. Sustainability as a category of economic science: Evolution, content, types. Gosudarstvennoe i munitsipal’noe upravlenie. Uchenye zapiski SKAGS = State and Municipal Management. NCAPA Scholar Notes. 2011; (3): 222-228. (In Russ.).

8. Chaikovskaya N. V. Problems of economic stability of the economic system of the region. Regional’naya ekonomika: teoriya i praktika = Regional Economics: Theory and Practice. 2005; (6): 33-35. (In Russ.).

9. Akimov A. A., Gamidov G. O., Kolosov V. G. Innovation and engineering tasks of economic restructuring. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State Technical University; 1997. 261 p. (In Russ.).

10. Kucherova E. N. Conceptual approaches to the sustainable development of an enterprise. Dissertant. 2008; (1): 12-15. (In Russ.).

11. Esekina B., Esekina A., Zhaysanbek I. Overview of selected national OECD green growth indicators. Ekonomika i statistika = Economics and Statistics. 2019; 3: 37–42. URL: http://nblib.library.kz/elib/library.kz/Economic%20jurnal/2019%20EiS/EiS%203%202019.pdf (accessed on: 20. 10. 2022). (In Russ.).

12. Lopatnikov L. I. Economic and mathematical dictionary. Dictionary of modern economic science. Moscow: Delo; 2003. 520 p. (In Russ.).

13. Linkov I., Trump B. D. The science and practice of resilience. Cham: Springer-Verlag; 2019. 209 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-04565-4

14. Arthur W. B. Foundations of complexity economics. Nature Reviews Physics. 2021; 3 (2): 136–145. DOI: 10.1038/s42254-020-00273-3

15. Foster K. A. A case study approach to understanding regional resilience. Berkeley Institute of Urban and Regional Development. Working Paper. 2007; (08). URL: https://www.econstor.eu/obitstream/10419/59413/1/592535347.pdf (accessed on 20. 10. 2022).

16. Ivanov D., Dolgui A., Sokolov B. Ripple effect in the supply chain: Definitions, frameworks and future research perspectives. In: Handbook of ripple effects in the supply chain. Cham: Springer-Verlag; 2019: 1-33. (International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. Vol. 276). DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-14302-2_1

17. Martin R., Sunley P. On the notion of regional economic resilience: Conceptualization and explanation. Journal of Economic Geography. 2015;15(1):1-42. DOI: 10.1093/jeg/lbu015

18. Myslyakova Yu. G. Regional potential of scientific and technological development of the national economy: Formalization and performance assessment. Ekonomika i upravlenie = Economics and Management. 2022; 28 (5): 419-429. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.35854/1998-1627-2022-5-419-429