Moscow, Moscow, Russian Federation
Financial autonomy is a key factor that determines the resource base for regional socio-economic development strategies. Russian regions differ in terms of socio-economic development: most constituent entities depend on non-repayable transfers from the federal center. In these settings, the analysis and assessment of the institutional factors that affect the system of intergovernmental fiscal redistribution become particularly relevant for regional strategizing. This article describes some patterns in the relationship between regional financial autonomy, the structure of intergovernmental transfers, and socio-economic development indicators. The constituent entities of the Russian Federation were grouped by the level of budgetary dependence on nonrepayable transfers. The analysis of the structure and dynamics of budgetary and socio-economic indicators covered the period from 2018 to 2024. The author also compared the tax potential and income inequality across regions. The final classification featured four groups of regions with different levels of dependence on non-repayable transfers. The study revealed the reproduction of structural polarization: in 2024, the gap in the share of non-repayable transfers between the extreme groups reached 49.4 percentage points. Regions with high financial autonomy demonstrated a reliable tax potential and a higher growth rate of gross regional product and household incomes. However, the same regions showed greater income inequality. Highly subsidized regions tended to depend on equalization transfers, which generated negative incentives for economic development in these territories. In general, the dependence on non-repayable transfers acts as a structural factor that determines the level of regional financial autonomy and limits the resources for long-term development strategies. The results may be used to improve regional development strategies of intergovernmental fiscal regulation mechanisms.
strategy, region, financial autonomy, strategizing, regional development strategy, intergovernmental transfers
1. Afanasieva EE. Financial independence of the budgets of the subjects of the Central Federal District: State and prospects of achievement. The Eurasian Scientific Journal. 2020;12(2):1–13. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/YMZPYO
2. Karavaeva IV, Giraev V. Fiscal decentralization as a basis for effective regional economic policy of regions. Federalism. 2018;(2):18–31. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/XSCKVN
3. Kvint VL. The concept of strategizing. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg: NWIM RANEPA; 2019. 132 p. (In Russ.)
4. Kvint VL. Strategic planning in Russia and the world: Importance of human interactions. Economics and Management. 2014;11:15–17. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/TENMXD
5. Kvint VL, Bodrunov SD. Strategizing the transformation of society: Knowledge, technology, noonomics. St. Petersburg: Institute of New Industrial Development named after SYu Witte; 2021. 351 p. (In Russ.)
6. Midov AZ. Analyzing the efficiency of inter-budget relations as a factor of resource security in the implementation of regional strategies. Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice. 2021;20(3):436–454. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24891/ea.20.3.436
7. Pyankova SG, Kombarov MA. Strengthening fiscal decentralization to reduce the heterogeneity of Russia’s economic space. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast. 2023;16(2):52–68. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2023.2.86.3
8. Sumskaya TV. Analysis of fiscal capacity of Russian regions: Approaches and conclusions. Region: Ekonomika I Sotsiologiya. 2025;2:29–52. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15372/REG20250202
9. Tymushev EN. Fiscal decentralization in Russia and the world: Trends and effects. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2021;(11):89–107. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-11-89-107
10. Khvorostyanaya AS, Kvint VL. Regional strategy development and implementation: Key stages and priorities. The North and the Market: Forming the Economic Order. 2025;28(3):25–34. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/QRDAZZ
11. Shakleina MV, Midov AZ. Strategic classification of regions according to the level of financial self-sufficiency. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast. 2019;12(3):39–54. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2019.3.63.3
12. Yushkov AO, Oding NYu, Savulkin LI. The trajectories of donor regions in Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2017;(9):63–82. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-9-63-82
13. Burriel P, Chronis P, Freier M, Hauptmeier S, Reiss L, et al. A fiscal capacity for the euro area: Lessons from existing fiscal-federal systems. ECB Occasional Paper Series. 2020;(239):58.
14. Brueckner M, Pappa E, Valentinyi A. Geographic cross-sectional fiscal spending multipliers and the role of local autonomy: Evidence from European regions. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking. 2023;55(6):1357–1396. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmcb.12974
15. Kappeler A, Solé-Ollé A, Stephan A, Välilä T. Does fiscal decentralization foster regional investment in productive infrastructure? European Journal of Political Economy. 2013;31:15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2013.03.003
16. Dougherty S, Harding M, Reschovsky A. Twenty years of tax autonomy across levels of government: Measurement and applications. OECD Working Papers on Fiscal Federalism. 2019;(29):1–38.
17. Gemmell N, Kneller R, Sanz I. Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: Spending versus revenue decentralization. Economic Inquiry. 2013;51(4):1915–1931.
18. Oates WE. Fiscal Federalism. Public Choice. 1973;14:155–157.
19. Oates WE. Toward a second-generation theory of fiscal federalism. International Tax and Public Finance. 2005;12(4):349–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-005-1619-9
20. Tiebout CM. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy. 1956;64(5):416–424.
21. Vigneault M. Intergovernmental fiscal relations and the soft budget constraint problem. IIGR Working Paper. 2005;(2):30.
22. Weingast BR. The performance and stability of federalism: An institutional perspective. Handbook of New Institutional Economics. Boston, MA: Springer; 2005. P. 149–172.
