Hybrid institutions of rural development

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅存取

详细

The problems of socio-economic development of rural areas require the development of innovative approaches to the formation of rural ecosystems. Recently, researchers have begun to pay attention to hybrid institutions for the formation of rural ecosystems, as institutions that have the properties inherent in institutions of an ideal type, and which can serve as a foundation for innovative development of rural areas, combining the qualities of not only social orientation and compliance with state priorities, but also commercial efficiency. Hybrid institutions operate not in one plane of ecosystem development, but at least in three: on the one hand, they form the foundation of economic relations, secondly, they ensure the social stability of territorial development, and thirdly, they favor the innovative development of the territorial socio-economic system. The formation of a system of hybrid institutions makes it possible to create hybrid organizations that play a decisive role in the management of public goods and territorial resources. Nevertheless, the systems of state support for rural development that stimulate the development of hybrid institutions remain insufficiently studied. This article discusses a case study of rural ecosystems on the example of the Sverdlovsk region, which presents different forms of support. The study showed that it is hybrid institutions that are able to expand the horizons of rural development, provide the necessary stability and their ability to self-development. With proper support systems and actors, hybrid institutions and hybrid organizations based on them to support rural development can not only flourish, but also have a significant impact on the socio-economic development of rural areas. This proves the need to take into account institutional diversity in the context of rural socio-economic ecosystems.Статья подготовлена в соответствии с Планом НИР Института Экономики Уральского Отделения РАН

作者简介

Sergey Polbitsyn

Udmurt Branch Institute of Economics of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: polbitsyn.sn@uiec.ru
старший научный сотрудник, д.э.н., доцент

参考

  1. Берсенёв В.Л. Экономические и правовые аспекты политики импортозамещения в аграрной сфере // Журнал экономической теории. – 2020. – № 4. – c. 922-931. – doi: 10.31063/2073-6517/2020.17-4.14.
  2. Зинич Л.В., Кузнецова Н.А. Институциональные условия развития сельскохозяйственных территорий, обеспечивающие формирование локальных зон производства сельскохозяйственной продукции // Продовольственная политика и безопасность. – 2022. – № 4. – c. 433-444. – doi: 10.18334/ppib.9.4.116360.
  3. Зубарева М.О., Власов М.В. Оценка институтов регионального развития // Журнал экономической теории. – 2011. – № 3. – c. 189-194.
  4. Мокина Л.С. Тенденции развития аграрного сектора свердловской области на современном этапе // Овощи России. – 2018. – № 4(42). – c. 55-61. – doi: 10.18619/2072-9146-2018-4-55-61.
  5. Морозова Е.В., Мирошниченко И.В., Рябченко Н.А. Гибридные политические институты: к проблеме типологизации // Человек. Сообщество. Управление. – 2015. – № 4. – c. 6-26.
  6. Огородникова Е.С., Плахин А.Е., Ростовцев К.В. Гибридная модель сферы социальных услуг: организационно-экономические аспекты // Journal of New Economy. – 2022. – № 1. – c. 131-148. – doi: 10.29141/2658-5081-2022-23-1-7.
  7. Олесиюк О.С., Светлаков А.Г. Современные противоречия в снижении социальной напряженности в негородских (сельских) территориях // Продовольственная политика и безопасность. – 2021. – № 1. – c. 85-96. – doi: 10.18334/ppib.8.1.111788.
  8. Полбицын С.Н. Роль институтов в развитии сельского предпринимательства // Экономика и предпринимательство. – 2021. – № 8(133). – c. 844-850. – doi: 10.34925/EIP.2021.133.8.158.
  9. Полбицын С.Н. Формирование стратегий повышения эффективности сельских предпринимательских организаций России // Экономические и социальные перемены: факты, тенденции, прогноз. – 2021. – № 6. – c. 126-140. – doi: 10.15838/esc.2021.6.78.7.
  10. Яркова Т.М. Развитие сельских территорий: социально-экономический аспект // Продовольственная политика и безопасность. – 2022. – № 1. – c. 67-78. – doi: 10.18334/ppib.9.1.114341.
  11. Acs Z.J., Estrin S., Mickiewicz T., Szerb L. Entrepreneurship, institutional economics, and economic growth: an ecosystem perspective // Small Business Economics. – 2018. – № 2. – p. 501-514. – doi: 10.1007/s11187-018-0013-9.
  12. Aidis R., Mickiewicz T., Estrin S. Institutions and entrepreneurship development in Russia: A comparative perspective // Journal of Business Venturing. – 2008. – p. 656-672. – doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.005.
  13. Aligica P.D., Boettke P.J. Challenging institutional analysis and development: The Bloomington school. - London: Routledge, 2019. – 176 p.
  14. Battilana J., Lee M., Walker J., Dorsey C. In search of the hybrid ideal // Stanford Social Innovation Review. – 2012. – № 3. – p. 50-55.
  15. Bowen H.P., De clercq D. Institutional context and the allocation of entrepreneurial effort // Journal of International Business Studies. – 2008. – № 4. – p. 747-767. – doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400343.
  16. Carlsson-Wall M., Kraus K., Messner M. Performance measurement systems and the enactment of different institutional logics: Insights from a football organization // Management Accounting Research. – 2016. – p. 45-61. – doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2016.01.006.
  17. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt Building theories from case-study research // Academy of Management Review. – 1989. – p. 532-550. – doi: 10.2307/258557.
  18. Francesco Chiodelli, Alessandro Coppola, Emanuele Belotti, Gilda Berruti, Isabella Clough Marinaro, Francesco Curci, Federico Zanfi The production of informal space: A critical atlas of housing informalities in Italy between public institutions and political strategies // Progress in Planning. – 2021. – p. 100495. – doi: 10.1016/j.progress.2020.100495.
  19. Roger Friedland, Robert R. Alford Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions. / In book: The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. - Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991. – 232-263 p.
  20. Jason Jay Navigating Paradox as a Mechanism of Change and Innovation in Hybrid Organizations // Academy of Management Journal. – 2012. – № 1. – doi: 10.5465/amj.2010.0772.
  21. Keith Taylor An analysis of the entrepreneurial institutional ecosystems supporting the development of hybrid organizations: The development of cooperatives in the U.S // Journal of Environmental Management. – 2021. – p. 112244. – doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112244.
  22. Martina Manara, Erica Pani Institutional hybrids through meso-level bricolage: The governance of formal property in urban Tanzania // Geoforum. – 2023. – p. 103722. – doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2023.103722.
  23. Popov E., Vlasov M. Modelling Evolution of Institutional Invention Cycle // Proceedings of the 16th european conference on knowledge management, eckm 2015: Сер. "Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Knowledge Management. Udine, 2015. – p. 603-611.
  24. Quattrone P. Governing social orders, unfolding rationality, and Jesuit accounting practices: A procedural approach to institutional logics // Administrative Science Quarterly. – 2015. – № 3. – p. 411-445.
  25. Ramamurti Ravi Public entrepreneurs: who they are and how they operate // California Management Review. – 1986. – № 3. – p. 142. – doi: 10.2307/41165207.
  26. Tommaso Ramus, Antonino Vaccaro, Stefano Brusoni Institutional Complexity in Turbulent Times: Formalization, Collaboration, and the Emergence of Blended Logics // Academy of Management Journal. – 2016. – № 4. – doi: 10.5465/amj.2015.0394.
  27. Paul Tracey, Nelson Phillips, Owen Jarvis Bridging Institutional Entrepreneurship and the Creation of New Organizational Forms: A Multilevel Model // Organization Science. – 2011. – № 1. – p. 60-80. – doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0522.
  28. Justin W. Webb, Laszlo Tihanyi, R. Duane Ireland, David G. Sirmon You say illegal, i say legitimate: entrepreneurship in the informal economy // Academy of Management Review. – 2009. – p. 492-510. – doi: 10.5465/AMR.2009.40632826.
  29. Welter F., Smallbone D. Institutional Perspectives on Entrepreneurial Behavior in Challenging Environments // Journal of Small Business Management. – 2011. – № 1. – p. 107-125. – doi: 10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00317.x.
  30. Wiklund Johan, Nikolaev B., Shir Nadav, Maw-Der Foo, Bradley S. Entrepreneurship and well-being: past, present, and future // Journal of Business Venturing. – 2019. – № 4. – p. 579-588. – doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.01.002.

版权所有 © Polbitsyn S.N., 2023

##common.cookie##