Gross domestic product share (%)

1970-1979

2007

2007  1970-1979 (%)

Industry as a whole

Manufacturing industry

Mining industry

Building

22,1

11,49

5.97

4,6

32,49

10.08

16,49

5,9

147

87,7

276,2

127,8

As shows reality, on the underdeveloped developing countries of Asia, Africa, Latin America and as a number of the states of the CIS it is export – the raw model is a model of deindustrialization and dependence on the foreign capital. Real, intensive development is impossible while the country gets raw materials in order that it was processed by foreign multinational corporations, accumulated at itself all benefits of production of end products with a high value added. The way to development is closed while such model works.

The developed countries are for today neoindustrial on a level of development of productive forces and state corporate software to character of dominating relations of production. It corresponds to a neoindustrialization stage when the physical work replaced by the intellectual turns in prevailing a kind of activity. From here objectively the corresponding development of fundamental and applied science, NIR and research and development, education and health care, quality control and working conditions and production, habitat of the person and social conditions of activity follows also.

The way of the forced industrialization of Kazakhstan is a way of neoindustrial equipment of again under construction enterprises the new tekhnotronny means of production corresponding to neoindustrial economy. Even at equipment, modernization and building of traditionally industrial objects, the hardware has to correspond to modern level of functioning of large productions with elements of innovations.

The developed structure of property in raw sector of Kazakhstan shows low interest of business in carrying out a full innovative cycle from a stage of research works to a conclusion to the market of new products and technologies. Orientation to strategy of simple technological loan within model of "catching-up development" really create threat of preservation of backwardness. It concerns not only foreign investors, but also domestic businessmen. Lag in development of new technologies of the last generation can sharply reduce competitiveness of economy of the republic even at the level of the Customs union and the Common economic space during the forthcoming period. Only formation of a complex of high-tech industries and expansion of a position of the knowledge-intensive production along with modernization of traditional branches of economy, especially on specialization branches, can bring the republic out of a zone "catching up" in ranks of "overtaking development".

Owing to limitation of investment means selective support of innovative projects, the rigid competition between projects for receiving necessary means is inevitable. The problem consists in a rational choice of priority innovative projects with providing expert system of selection of projects. In this regard publicity of competitions on selection of projects, determination of their comparative efficiency and stage-by-stage control of their realization isn't less important. Unfortunately, in the conditions of temporary deficiency and urgency of the forced industrialization in Kazakhstan the pursuit of number of projects prevailed, there is no due transparency on their selection and efficiency of realization.

Certainly, the state can't be the only subject of innovative development, it has to lean on different forms of state-private business which works for today insufficiently effectively. It is one of key problems of the Kazakhstan modernization. Large investors have no economic incentives for investments in the domestic industry, especially in branch with an average and long-term log. Profitability of the knowledge-intensive productions doesn't exceed on the average 7-8%. At the first, medium-term stage of industrialization the republic will naturally rely on the institutional reforms directed on improvement of public administration by the FIIR Program. Further, the problem of ensuring economic growth is assigned to the market with fluctuations of rate of return which are reflected in rates of expanded reproduction and capital accumulation. The government, certainly, can't directly influence change of profitability of the capital, defined by level of technologies and efficiency of use of resources. But it can influence through regulation of the offer of money and the state obligations a market assessment of the capital and by that on its activity Such work while neither the industry Ministry, nor the Ministry of economic development don't carry out. Everything is given to regional levels which "drive an inconstancy" to report to higher instances. What concrete levels of state-private and private business that has serious consequences not only for efficiency, but also economic safety of the country in the subsequent are unknown to the general public. From these positions important whose will be, finally, the erected enterprises for criterion of property and whose interests will be represented by the erected object, what sort of preference and a privilege provides them the state as taxation level in medium-term and distant prospect is predicted, especially on a Production Sharing Agreement (to agreements on production section) or to the concession enterprises and as all this will be reflected in final efficiency of the project, And, at last, paramount in what measure industrial projects will be connected with domestic market and (Customs union) and EEP (Common economic space) HARDWARE market.

Though universal process of globalization is defined by dynamics of post-industrial type of world economy, objectively it is necessary to recognize that the industrialization stage, characteristic for an industrial stage, in developing, transitional economies is still far from end. The objective economic law of unevenness of economic and social development vanguard and developing countries is reality. From these positions it is necessary to recognize fair opinion of the Russian economist S. Gubanov what not the share of sector of services defines a level of development of this or that country during a neoindustrial era. Development of leading powers of the world is provided at the expense of production of means of production, instead of services. Defining technologies in the main productions in the sphere of automation, touch automatic control of systems of cars which equally define a technical basis of functioning, scales and efficiency of a services sector and services appear.

In the conditions of the countries of a post-socialism the law of corporate development of industrial economy was violently broken. There was a system contradiction between private and economic, oligarchical and state interests in economy. The uniform technological chain of reproduction created in a uniform economic complex of the former Union was destroyed. Process of privatization was objectively necessary. But the accelerated and radical nature of transition to market system not only broke links of the interconnected subjects of managing, but also assigned them to separate private owners. The comprador economic system aimed at extraction of profit from intermediate production set in. The raw materials using to the greatest demands (oil, gas, metals) find direct sale abroad, all subsequent repartitions of manufacturing industry lost former loading, production of modern knowledge-intensive production became small-scale, and even was at all laid off in view of lack of demand in the market. Both in Russia, and in Kazakhstan "the Dutch illness" when violent destruction of links of reproduction in the industry degenerated in a natural dominant of raw sector in which development foreign investors with the subsequent adjunction to them the comprador national bourgeoisie rushed was artificially created so-called. The corporate behavior of new owners was directed generally on receiving profit by use of a monopoly position in the market, especially in export and raw branches of the economy, making intermediate, instead of end products. The policy of "adaptation" to the being formed market, presented by ideologists of radical reforms as the unique way of an exit to a way of progress and future prosperity, appeared in practice a pursuit of the mercenary purpose in intermediate export and raw spheres, at the general rupture of links of reproduction between the enterprises extracting, processing and letting-out end products. Essentially new reorientation of strategy of national economy and formation of the uniform finished links of the interconnected productions on branches and spheres with an exit to end products rises with special sharpness and urgency at a stage of the forced industrialization. The new stage of industrialization on the basis of the neoindustrial concept has to include:

- the accelerated restructuring of a national economy with transition from mainly raw production to production of hi-tech, competitive products of final consumption;

- formation and expansion of sector of modern innovative and industrial branches with the subsequent exit of their production to the international quality standards and reliability.

Experience of world economy shows that economic structures of a corporate form are formed on the basis of the leading industrial companies of a research and production profile. Leadership industrial the developed countries in production of goods is provided not with mythical prevalence of services in GNP, and increase of a share of the powerful vertically integrated corporate structures covering all links of reproduction process and capable productively to solve problems of steady financing of research and development, design, development, a mass mass production and realization of production of new generation. Consecutive formation and functioning of the vertically integrated corporations in partner interaction with the state has special value for Kazakhstan. Development of the vertically integrated structures on the basis of strategic planning of market mechanisms of managing will provide possibility of effective interaction of the country with environment, since the markets of the states of the neighboring countries and integration into the world market. The external economic integration it is impossible on the basis of tightly profile corporations of raw type. They are interesting to multinational corporation and FPG is exclusive as external partners - suppliers of cheap raw materials and hydrocarbons. In the conditions of Kazakhstan they appear as branches of foreign multinational corporations and the state, being in them the shareholder – minoritarny is limited to the minimum tax withdrawals from profit. Vertically – the integrated complexes in the conditions of Kazakhstan can't arise without initiation and active support of the state with allocation of a number of priority branches and productions which could develop the accelerated rates within the private and state and state vertically integrated corporations.

1.2 . Institutional and organizing role of the state as subject of modernization

According to the neoliberal concept of openness of economy each country, being based on the absolute and relative advantages in the international division of labor, has to specialize on production of those benefits on which has rather low alternative expenses. According to this doctrine – a message the country with rich natural resources has to get and deliver them to the countries for support and ensuring more perfect processing productions.

In reality the state strategy of a number of the countries having unique resources, allows them to overcome successfully a fate of a raw appendage of others and to achieve high technological and economic development. As example of that the United Arab Emirates (United Arab Emirates) got access to the advanced world technologies both systemically modernizing and economy, and all complex of social and economic living conditions appear. The unique social system is created: free education and medicine, system of social support of different segments of the population. It is an example of overcoming of pseudoscientific concepts (not disinterested to please to imperial interests of the developed countries). The problem of economic policy consists in transformation of advantages of a natural origin into technological, social advantages, into creative structural modernization of economy and all social sphere on the basis of evolutionary transformation of the distributive relations of property.

World experience of modernization of developing countries, including China, India and Brazil and large-scale system modernization of economy of the USSR during a time of industrialization of the 30th years (in much more difficult conditions of the international environment and rigid resource restrictions) is connected first of all with radical change of theoretical bases and social and economic base of transformations where national interests of the state and social welfare of society are pursued first of all. In Kazakhstan and other CIS countries it isn't reached yet logical unity between economic theories and policy of post-crisis economic growth. In Russia on pages of scientific editions there is an active criticism of the liberal idea which has seized minds of scientists and politicians to the pre-crisis period and need of transition to new model of economic growth is actively proved. In Kazakhstan, despite open declaration of a priority of a state policy of support of the FIIR program, among scientific community and governmental circles adherents of liberal idea weren't released yet from a neoliberal monetaristic concept in policy of economic growth. In it the contradiction and an originality of "the left illness" in the theory and practice of post-crisis transformation of economy of Kazakhstan is shown. The state initiative and support of modernization and orientation of private initiatives remain inconsistent, insufficiently system. It was visually found during formation of strategic "Program-2020" where the accelerated formation of investment programs without rather differentiated their scientific and methodical justification on in general industrial, technologically advanced and innovative projects prevails. Thus, for Kazakhstan the prepotent organizing role of the state in formation of programs, attraction of investments, mobilization of internal and external subjects of the market in their realization is characteristic. In this aspect in the theoretical and scientific and practical plan not only in Kazakhstan, but also in the countries of a post-socialism the problem of the increased role of the state at a decisive stage of high-quality revival of economy of the transitional countries as organizer and the active subject of modernization of economy and social the relations isn't developed. It is especially important in implementation of the long-term program "Strategy — 2030". Only on the basis of such development it is possible to set theoretical vision of the concept, strategy, system modernization of domestic economy with identification of the main directions, means, rates and terms of its realization. At the solution of an extraordinary ambitious problem of promotion of Kazakhstan in number of fifty competitive countries of the world as practice of other developing countries according to the solution of identical tasks shows, into the forefront the state role as subject of modernization objectively moves forward. It is impossible will disagree with opinion of the prof. K.Hubiyeva that modernization moreover large-scale, in principle is impracticable at minimization of the state participation in economy … If to undertake the solution of problems of modernization, it is necessary to define theoretically a place and key actions of the state at all stages of implementation of large-scale modernization of a national economy.

Naturally, a material basis of real influence of the state as subject of modernization can only the role and state influence in economy is. If earlier it judged on a share of fixed assets, in market conditions state indicators in stock market, sales volume and employment aren't less important. It is very difficult question, but by all estimates, the state, both in Russia, and in Kazakhstan seeks to expand definitely the presence at economy, especially for the last five years. In Russia there are branches where the state occupies command heights. For example, oil, gas, banking sector. In Kazakhstan, on the contrary, consequences of radical privatization when state positions, especially in key branches and spheres, were considerably undermined aren't overcome yet. The state has to regulate the presence at economy permanently. Business isn't always interested in long-term investments, especially in processing and is low - profitable spheres, so important for national economy. Therefore the state has to remain in many branches, supporting branch or being its locomotive. Such approach to state ownership is conceptually important at a stage of post-crisis modernization of economy of developing countries when the problem of their survival becomes extremely actual.

Share of the state enterprises in gross domestic product of the countries of the world

№

Countries

Share

1.

China

32%

2.

Russia

28%

3.

Spain

15%

4.

Sweden

11%

5.

Kazakhstan

9%

6.

Switzerland

2%

In compliances with the new Law "About the State Property" (1.03.11. ) in the republic in 2012-2013g.g. full inventory of state ownership with its revaluation and the functional analysis of activity, including public industries and joint stock companies supervised by the state and LLP, and as national holdings and the companies will be carried out. The solution of a question is thus lawful: leisure statements about a priori weak efficiency of the state enterprises and subjects of property in the conditions of the market and how objectively their presence at economy of the transitional and developed market systems are how reasonable. Whether there has to be the state enterprise in the market if on it are present a number of the stable private companies, successfully replacing functions of the state? Will be as the bases for part nationalization entirely private assets are revealed. In case of compulsory repayment of assets nationalization can be dictated by the state interests.

Sources of the urgent, landslide privatization which has led to premature destruction of basic subjects of state ownership had reformers – avant-gardists of Russia who in 80-90 years at active intervention of the western advisers developed and offered boarding policy of destruction of public (command) property and the forced formation of private subjects of the market. It is a question about hasty, programs of market transformations ("The program 300, 500 of days") G. Yavlinsky, S. Shatanin, and even at all brought unprecedented destructions of financial and currency system of E.Gaydar. Life completely disproved antiscientific adventurism of these insolvent market "prophets". The economy – the difficult inert system, which transformation is subordinated to evolutionary, gradualistky laws of transition to new quality. So I arose, the capitalist system throughout the last five centuries, since Cromwell's revolution in England evolved and was updated. I suffered historical failure socialist experiment in Russia, spread in the country not last the developed phases of capitalism. In the same way shared similar lot and the former colonies and the dependent countries of the Russian Empire where for over 70 years vainly cultivated noncapitalistic a progress way from feudalism by a socialism, passing capitalism.

  Russia in the 90th years of the last century "missed chance" to carry out evolutionary changes and once again was given on favor to extreme radicalism. As well as in 1917, in the country the impatience and adventurism got the best. And the gradualism and a pragmatism were the Russian authorities unclaimed as a result of absolutization so-called "universal universal regularities" developed market without initial conditions and country features of transitional systems. Speculative designs of fastest "celebration" of liberalism, shock transformation of economic and social structure of society, fast and resolute dismantle of the state socialism prevailed. Possibility of gradual transformation of all countries of a post-socialism in socially focused market economy of the mixed type it was missed, and market changes get at the price of huge social difficulties and expenses.

Adherents of the accelerated planting of the developed pseudo-market relations became more active at the beginning and in Kazakhstan. Besides, without having a little practical experience and due vocational training activists – reformers positioned themselves under E.Gaydar, Yavlinsky and gave out itself for neoliberals and the adherents of monetarism hoping for a postulate of market self-regulation, "an invisible hand" market. Considerable their number подвизается still in okolovlastny structures also continues to defend the thesis about "inefficiency" of state regulation, "manual control" even in the conditions of crisis and the increased role of state ownership. Worse than that, they definitely influence and the mighty of this world and the young shots which have been brought up on canons "экономик’с" at the western universities. They not quite realize and accept special character of an endured historical stage when the country future is solved: "to be or not to be" it among the competitive countries and urgency of radical technological modernization of economy and the increased role of the state and statehood in the solution of these urgently important and fatal tasks. The theory, methodology and practice of their decision define essentially new approaches to a problem, serious studying and creative application of neokeynsinsky approaches to a state role in regulation of economy and management of process of the forced industrialization and innovative development of the republic as a whole.

The ten-year period (1998 for 2008) economic growth in Russia, Kazakhstan, the countries with similar structure of economy and problems of its modernization, had raw character at the expense of an export environment. It was actually, by well-aimed definition of the Russian economist K.Hubiyev, compensation growth without economic development, without a real technological basis, as factor of industrial capitalism. Technological updating on an innovative basis – a main goal and natural result of development of the big and small countries and the main objective of economic policy of a transitional stage.

In the conditions of transformation of the transitional countries the internal forces directed to capture of state ownership and financial streams, especially natural resources, together with branches of foreign multinational corporations are directed to receiving the maximum profit in short terms, instead of structural modernization of economy. This intrinsic maintenance of favourites. From here both deregulation and creation unilaterally a liberal mode for raw export that can't but actually wash away a material basis of technological modernization. The objective analysis of external and internal conditions of further progress of Kazakhstan at a critical stage of its development caused FIIR Program initiation for the period 2010-2020g.g. It is regularity, the unique way of a conclusion of the country on a way of modernization and economy updating where the state, proceeding from the developed situation and being guided by economic laws, assumes functions of regulation of processes of revival of economy. The state, understanding responsibility for destiny of national economy, has to develop first of all the program and mechanisms of mobilization of potrebny resources for the innovative purposes and sources. Thus it has to use the first stage belonging to it by the right of the public power and the natural resources constitutionally fixed to it, state ownership on the income of a rent and exclusive origin. It is a question of realization of advantages of adjustable modernization before planless, spontaneous. Therefore the state the only subject – the initiator of the hi-tech strategic Program of economy assumes the obligation for its realization on the basis of the actions of external and internal subjects of innovative process participating to some extent in the course of creation of objects of neoindustrial economy. Thus it should be noted that the Program of industrial and innovative development of Kazakhstan is considerably other than practice of the Russian Federation where state positions in the relations of property are rather strong and the foreign capital is considerably limited, especially in strategic branches and spheres. Nevertheless, a problem of attraction of investment resources including external, in Russia costs as sharply. In scientific community the opinion ripens: in case private owners who privatized in due time objects for symbolical vouchers, and don't show readiness to participate in industrialization and innovative activity, it is possible to resort to an extraordinary action - nationalization with compensation of their real expenses for object and taking into account the income received from privatization. If to consider the extremely illegitimate character of the largest private property formed owing to unfair extortionate methods, redistribution of assets in favor of innovative and motivated and investment and well-founded objects is possible. One of subjects can be and the state when resources for strategic problems of modernization are required. Speech can go about the new reform comparable from transformational property to redistribution and assets with a vector of an innovative orientation. Especially, according to the FIIR RK Program the task of development of special measures of the forced modernization of all operating enterprises is set. Full audit of efficiency of updating of the fixed business assets of all large enterprises of Kazakhstan with the announcement of open competition on the forced modernization of assets is planned. As N.A.Nazarbayev at the 23rd plenary session of Council of foreign investors noted at the president of RK: "We can't wait while will work market laws of the competition. It is a question of efficiency and timely modernization of the assets".

The neoliberal model of market elements with reliable on self-regulation and balance at a stage of a system world economic crisis showed the insolvency. Failure comprehended Anglo-Saxon orthodox neoclassical the theory, applying for model of a new world order in the second half of the XX century. The USA dictated conditions of "The Washington consensus" to other countries and the international organizations. The main thing – released from a regulating role of the state and provided to itself economy automatically comes to concepts to balance with a maximum level of welfare. But for years of crisis (2008-2010g.g. )  the world economy, including industrially developed countries, endured unknown in a peace time transformational recession. Deep recession was characteristic and for Russia. Besides growth rates of economy for a decade previous crises on developing countries, generally raw, weren't real. They are reached not as a result of modernization, and to a rise in prices for energy carriers and mining and metallurgical raw materials in the world market.

In the West and in Russia the scientific world is occupied to active searches of alternative model of economy with a certain trend in Keynesian ideas which for the last decades were issued in the direction of economic thought of higher level – a neokeysianstvo, model of Keynesian regulation of economy with "the state of general prosperity". The professor of the Cambridge university D. Lane differentiates two models of capitalism: "liberal and market" and "it is organized - market economy". The model of the liberal market is characteristic for Anglo-Saxon societies (the USA, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand). Here firms operate on the competitive markets. Target signals, supply and demand act as the main indicators. In alternative model of the relation of firms are more focused on the cooperation and exchange of information relations. Activity of the companies is coordinated through vertical or horizontal associations. Successfully the Chinese planned and market model of economy aimed not at profit, and as far as it is possible, on growth of public welfare functions. It quite in line with the post-Keynesian concept (ensuring full entertaining and steady growth of economy).

 "Economy liberalization" actually didn't stimulate an economic initiative, provided prime interests of the large capital as in Russia, and Kazakhstan and, as a result, led to obvious disproportions, a disbalance in economy. This and one-sided development of extracting industries to the detriment of processing, decline of the knowledge-intensive production, dependence of the country on import of technologies. Characterizing high to the gross domestic product loudspeaker of Russia, Kazakhstan, some other the countries of a post-socialism for 1998-2008g.g. the Russian economists define it as "growth without development", dependent on the foreign capital and neoindustrial modernization of the country inadequate to essential problems. As concrete signs "growth without development", based on market fundamentalism, they isolate:

- dependence the gross domestic product loudspeakers, the income of the budget and internal demand from export prices of oil, i.e. from inflation of petrodollars;

- disintegration of public reproduction owing to mining industry isolation from the processing;

- the artificial low cost of labor caused by an imbalance between a labor productivity level and size of a salary;

- import of inflation and submission of the internal prices, including bank rates, profitability export-import and operations on the stock exchange;

- nonequivalent exchange, in the form of first of all export of production with a low value added (oil, gas, wood, metals, fertilizers, grain) for the sake of production import with higher value added (cars, the equipment, the food, meat), etc.

These disproportions (disbalance) in economy of the transitional countries including Kazakhstan, now at recovery from the crisis are axiomatic. On the contrary, the developed countries, having state and corporate economic system with vertical integration, overcome crisis at the expense of updating of the industrial capital and labor productivity increase. Following the results of 2009 labor productivity in the USA grew by 6,1%, and in production of neondustrialny means of labor it made 8,7% (on materials of economic monitoring of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation). In Russia, on the contrary, labor productivity decreased in a year by 5% and the nominal increase in gross domestic product renewed at the expense of inflation of petrodollars and a rise in prices of raw export. Such dynamics of economic growth and labor productivity is characteristic and for Kazakhstan. Growth of currency and reserve funds of the state in these conditions, based on inflation of petrodollars, considerably means continuation of policy of monetization of an export and raw rent, return to monetaristic approach in foreign trade.

The current social and economic state of Kazakhstan considerably continues to depend on inflation of petrodollars and the prices of raw export that reflects an inertial tendency and will complicate essentially the project of new industrialization. In it relative unavailability of business community is shown to support the initiative of the government of economy modernization. In it a real contradiction of a stage of the forced industrial and innovative development when the government generally should lean on foreign investments and internal accumulation of the state assets. The export and raw companies against liberal privileges and preferences in the financial underdeveloped market, being guided generally by capital export, actually narrow financial streams to the sphere of innovative and industrial programs. In system of interests of business by defining tendency there is a maximizing tactical short-term profit and a raw rent than priorities of the long-term neoindustrial development, forming bases of national economic system with integration of extracting and processing branches. Problem of responsibility of the owner of the private capital on all range of activity – from implementation of obligations under employment contracts to a contribution to social and economic development of the country it was delivered to N.A.Nazarbayevs at the 24th plenary session of Council of foreign investors at the President of RK (18.05.11г. )  Equally further deepening of legal responsibility of power structures on rational use of the centralized currency reserves arises, "Assignment" by the government of the right of redistribution of a public product inevitably assumes public, transparent and effective use of these reserves in aspect of the organization of urgent problems of neoindustrial production of the knowledge-intensive industrial output with a high share of a value added and involvement in this process of equally interested external and internal subjects of property.

The raw dominant of economy of Kazakhstan, as well as Russia, with prevalence of private assignment and the corresponding distribution of the income and increase of external financial dependence in a certain measure reduce regulatory possibility of internal financial potential. All this defines sharp fluctuations of balance of the offer of currency in the market and demand. In these conditions the currency policy of National bank is in dependence from external regulation when the rate of tenge is defined by fluctuation in prices of export raw materials of the republic. It reduces possibility of management of currency risks. Deregulation and neoindustrial modernization – are incompatible. As regulators have to act not only the state, but also corporate structures in interests of sustainable social and economic development. The important part is assigned to business for results of managing, including technical re-equipment of production and its conclusion to qualitatively higher level with providing the raised level of labor and enterprise activity. The special role of business in implementation of the program of forsirovaniye of industrialization of Kazakhstan was emphasized on Council of foreign investors at the President of RK.

Today in the world the new tendency to socialization of factors of production is accurately designated: to multiply property for maximizing a social production. Strategic approach to transformational processes in the country according to interests of society as a whole is planned. A number of leading western and Russian economists thus consider that the concept of every possible strengthening of the state and its institutes, increases of their role in modernization, influences on political and economic life has to become a key link of reforming. The economic policy and state role then are effective when all society, and not just interests of the large private capital becomes their social support. The main task – to stop today process of unfair assignment of national wealth of the country, to expand state ownership on a basis and in interests of society. The state has to not only be present at economy, but also is active invest real sector of economy. For restoration of investment ability of economy and creation of new workplaces the state form of ownership pursuing real public interests, according to the Russian scientists, has to occupy not less than 55-60%. American economist Dzh. Stiglitz which views of negative consequences of the Russian economic reforms and recovery from the crisis ways at the heart of the coincide with views of neokeynesians, in work "Globalization: disturbing tendencies" notes: "… The it is more difficult than a problem of social and economic development of society, the role of state regulation" is more important. On Russia, according to J. Stiglitz, reforms correction on a number of key questions is required. The main thing in reform not only liberalization and privatization, and the main thing − it is necessary to create conditions for ensuring steady dynamic economic growth. In his opinion, in the future Russia has to try to put an end to further plunder of the riches, to attract legitimate investors, having provided rule of law. Reckless, total privatization of state ownership at any cost promoted creation of oligarchical capitalism, sources and which extent of wealth not result of the natural competition, and noneconomic possibility of access to investment and exclusive incomes, a consequence of their assignment by a narrow circle of people. The today's category of a private property in Russia, other CIS countries which have endured "shock therapy" has no objective legal basis. The large oligarchical capital in the West, passed through many stages of evolutionary economic development, on the contrary, has the developed relations between the state, business and a hired class, controllability of economy is, as a rule, high, and public administration is under control of all branches of the power: legislative, executive and judicial. The share of the state in gross domestic product in France, Germany and other West European countries makes more than 50%. It is established practices of the developed market systems where the state role in management of strategic spheres of economy, definition of priorities of modernization and innovative technologies, prospects of development of the country is indisputable.

Today it is lawful to claim that state ownership available level on leading CIS countries including across Kazakhstan, doesn't meet objective requirements of development of economy for innovative industrially way. Preservation basis behind the state of control functions and levers of regulation of the sphere of production of goods and real influence on economic processes is possession of the state of material factors of production: water and land resources, forest fund, subsoil and the mineral minerals containing in them, the developed production infrastructure, energy resources. All these factors of production have to be in state ownership, shouldn't be object of privatization, a subject of purchase and sale and other actions. Subsoil, natural resources – basic components of national wealth, have to be used for the good of all society, instead of on enrichment of limited group of the population. The Russian scientists prove the offer, proceeding from insufficient legitimacy of oligarchical property in the country, about nationalization of a number of the large enterprises, the companies (partly with repayment) in case they will enter into the conflict to the state strategy of radical modernization of economy. The state as the owner of natural resources and operating their companies can find thus a uniform social basis for the solution of priority problems of the forced industrialization. In the conditions of Kazakhstan in view of the developed concrete circumstances in subsurface use it is expedient to realize similar radical measures gradually, by controlling stake finding with the corresponding economical and legal consequence. So, it is consistently possible to overcome a distortion in the relations of property and to restore an exclusive constitutional law of the state on a subsoil with the subsequent overcoming of an imbalance of economy and reorientation of investments into real sector as bases of new industrialization. Actually for today in the country the raw capital, instead of industrial is dominating. In structure of export of Kazakhstan and Russia of 67 and 76% respectively occupy mineral products. The main income supporting national economy and social inquiries of the population, is provided, first of all, with raw materials export. The domestic industrial policy, its investment opportunities are put in system dependence on raw inquiries of the leading foreign states, their multinational corporation, i.e. from inquiries of the foreign capital, a foreign market.

Defining regularity of neoindustrialization and its condition – construction vertically – the integrated economy embodied in multinational corporations (multinational corporation) with vertically integrated structure of property, the productive capital, innovatively focused technological chains. As practice of developing transitional economies where there is no high-concentrated sector of multinational corporation and vertical integration of economy testifies, there is no neoindustrialization also. Both of these regularities develop in a neoindustrial paradigm and a form of modern development: neoindustrialization plus vertical integration of economy.

In real economy of the countries of a post-socialism, including Kazakhstan, developing under the sign of total privatization and a dominant of a private property, vertical integration of economy at the level of former all-union division of labor was destroyed both separate subjects and the separate enterprises – fragments remained out of integration communications and formation of the real vertically integrated centers of economy rises for today in the agenda in all sharpness. It is feasible to only the national state with consecutive overcoming of private oligarchical interests of raw monopolies. It is a question of comprador interests of the national bourgeoisie and branches of the foreign multinational corporations taken root into economy of the republic and having own interests. Interests of oligarchical groups are incompatible with nation-wide and economic requirements of vertical integration of economy and intensive neoindustrial development of the republic. The dezintegrirovanny economy separated on objects and poorly governed is necessary to oligarchical owners. To the republic when problems of the forced industrialization are solved, the large domestic companies, capable to serve as a driving force of radical modernization with production and processing association in uniform intersectoral corporations with an exit on international the market are required. Contradiction between oligarchical and state interests, giving special sharpness to all socially – to economic problems and the property relations, grows in the main system contradiction of stage FIIR RK.

As a result of uskorenno-violent privatization and a partition of former technological interrelations of the enterprises and spheres on the isolated links, fixed to separate private owners, raw materials – intermediate production as more favorable capital investment spheres, especially foreign, escaped for export, manufacturing industry lost loading, and internal demand for consumer goods and technology was filled with import. Market reforming with orientation to spontaneous self-regulation and violent elimination of the state from economy actually turned back deindustrialization. Therefore the republic, as well as Russia, and other CIS countries when the Western world during the post-crisis period solves neoindustrialization problems, are compelled to be engaged closely in industrialization of primary branches and spheres with orientation to a transfer of foreign technologies. Speech doesn't go yet about formation of together vertically integrated and technologically interfaced links and the repartitions specialized on release of end products with a high value added. The social production generally remains truncated to raw and there are no full-fledged intersectoral corporations. Industrialization programs on regions and about the country as a whole on the organization considerably have separate, dot character.

At a recovery from the crisis stage each of developing countries develops the strategy of recovery from the crisis and the subsequent development, aimed at preservation of own economic potential and advancing creation of preconditions of growth of new productions.

It is connected with protection of strategic assets and domestic market against excess inflow of the foreign speculative capital, and as carrying out active scientific and technical and structural policy on formation of the competitive enterprises and the companies on the perspective directions of economic growth. Respectively it assumes existence of effective system of strategic planning and the steady national financial and investment system leaning in a defining measure on internal sources of the credit and protected from destabilizing impacts of world financial crisis.

Development of the national concept of economic growth of the country, its scientific justification, development of offers on the concept of such strategy, understood as a complex of key ideas, views, the principles giving a complete idea of possible scenarios of development of society, the republic – a zone of responsibility of science. And definition of the content of national strategy, formation on its basis of specific programs – certainly a prerogative and a duty of the government which bears responsibility for a choice of this or that scenario on the basis of which strategy is formed. Strategy is a statement of an initial condition of a sustainable development. Such strategy in the form of long-term programs of development of decisive spheres of economy, infrastructure complexes are realized over the countries – leaders of world economy. (The USA, Japan, EU countries, Brazil, India and China) and to the countries applying for regional leadership (Turkey, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea), etc. Strategic programs of social and economic development are developed in Russia ("Strategy-2020") and Kazakhstan ("Strategy-2030" and "Strategy-2020"). As the integral part of "Strategy-2020" in Kazakhstan is actively realized the Program forced industrially – innovative development for 2010-2020.

At the present stage after an exit from world crisis on leaders developed and to developing countries problems of development of the fifth technological way (globalization of information space, full use of composite materials, emergence of genetic engineering) are actively solved and each of them seeks to occupy own niche, in world scientific and technological progress. Thus Russia, according to the conclusion of the Russian Academy of Sciences, with the solution of a number of priority scientific tasks can apply for the advanced positions in aircraft industry, nuclear power, space-rocket system, in separate segments of the market nano – and biotechnologies. But the initial level "Concepts of Long-term Social and Economic Development of Russia for the Period for 2020." remains while low (number of the organizations which are carrying out, tekhnologo-innovative development doesn't reach 10%). Level of release of innovative goods (4-5%) is respectively low. The president of the Russian Federation in the message to Federal Assembly (2009) openly recognizes: "… We didn't get rid of primitive structure of economy, of humiliating raw dependence. Competitiveness of our production is shamefully low". And it at high rates of economic development of Russia for previous decade in 6,9%. The state was late with transition to innovative development. On the contrary, "Obama-Biden's anti-recessionary law" from 17.02.2009г. it is directly focused on the plan of investments of the XXI century on entry of the American economy into a new technological platform of competitiveness. Practice of economic growth of Kazakhstan is identical to Russia. Experience of the abroad, Russia and Kazakhstan shows that it is impossible entirely hopes for state opportunities in realization of problems of industrial and innovative development: the state, applying mobilization methods, it is capable to carry out dot innovative breaks, including in strategically important areas (space, nuclear, rocket production, etc.) But innovative and economic growth is broader, "covers a condition of public reproduction as a whole when development happens at the expense of wide use of technical, technological, organizational and administrative innovations, knowledge in the corresponding areas". The state owing to inherent natural restrictions (the main thing – the right of the order property, the assignment and order relations …) isn't able to influence subjects of managing fully. The smallest innovative activity is characteristic for the most profitable branches of a raw complex where the specific weight of the organizations which are carrying out technological innovations makes 5-7%, and the highest (from 15 to 26%) – in low-profitable productions of mechanical engineering. If large corporations don't show demand for innovations, doesn't follow hopes for development of small innovative business. Therefore along with investment and innovative activity of the state, the last respectively has to create institutional conditions for activization of innovative behavior of businessmen. It is unlikely will seriously lower various countervailing measures (credit and investment, tax privileges or mechanisms of state-private joint financing) the highest investment risks of the businessman on the organization of the innovative enterprise. Innovations will be apprehended by the businessman if they appear the main factor of its successful activity and maximizing profit. And the structural, technological modernization, demanding long-term investments in material resources of business activity and the human capital, not promising maximizing result, pales into insignificance.

1.4 . Management of strategic spheres and innovative orientation of investment activity

The question of a role of public administration in economic and social processes especially became aggravated in CIS countries during the poreformenny period when adherents of neoliberal school, the western experts aspired as it is possible to minimize participation of the state in privatization and privatization processes. So market transformations and young reformers and in Kazakhstan, enduring an apprenticeship time perceived. Participation of the state in management of national economy was perceived by an anachronism of directive and planned system which was subject to elimination during reforms. Not liberal recommendations turned back actually violent replacement of the state as subject of economic activity from economy. Researches of the world bank of the beginning of 2000 showed that worldwide the states kept the positions in economy. And experts were compelled to recognize: "… The good government is not luxury, and vital need … Without the effective state the sustainable development both economic, and social is impossible". Comparative data on scales of participation of the state in regulation of economic processes show what exactly the advanced countries with the developed market mechanisms are characterized by the highest scales of expenses on public administration. The public expenditures on management of economic and social processes on industrially – to the developed countries reach a half of their gross domestic product, and on developing countries – at level ¼. It is necessary to have to a look and an incomparable difference in gross domestic product scales to present real level of expenses on developed and to developing countries.

Countries

2000

2002

2003

2004

Russia

26,8

31,6

29,9

27,5

Kazakhstan

23,2

22,1

23,0

22,6

Czechia

38,3

41,9

41,6

40,0

Argentina

-

29,3

28,7

27,1

GB

9,2

41,1

42,5

42,9

Germany

47,4

48,0

48,5

47,3

Denmark

54,3

55,9

56,0

56,1

Finland

49,5

49,3

50,5

50,5

France

50,6

52,5

53,1

52,9

США

-

34,6

35,2

34,9

Канада

-

38,9

38.4

37.5

Australia

34,4

35,7

35,0

35,1

S. Africa

32,1

32,0

32,4

33,5

Japan

-

35,5

35,0

-

Despite an insignificant share of the public expenditures for economic and social management for 2011-2012 across Russia and Kazakhstan are planned privatization of the state equity stakes ("blue chips" on FNB "Samruk-Kazyna") that will lead to even bigger decrease in a share of expenses of the consolidated budget. Implementation of the program of the forced industrialization demands at the initial stage of the state initiatives and investment activity. And Russia takes a reference point on further decrease in expenses of the state budget with finishing them to 22-23% to gross domestic product (the project of the Ministry of economic planning), i.e. levels, characteristic on the average for underdeveloped countries are lower. In modern conditions in Kazakhstan in view of urgent problems of implementation of the FIIR program the state, acting at the same time as the participant of state-private business and the economic regulator, is in great need in investments, capitalization of the companies. Privatization is necessary and considerably will fill up the state budget. According to experts, sale of assets is expedient to only strategic investors buying at once the big equity stake. And here implementation of the stocks IPO by small parts at the domestic exchanges without the second listing at foreign stock exchanges is inefficient, will lead to falling of quotations. And in that, and other option the risk of is great that the investor interested in a large package elementary will buy up actions at small shareholders in times below, than it would give for a large package as the strategic investor. For the state it is a real loss: illusions "about national capitalism" under the pressure of the newly appeared large owner – the shareholder will be disseminated as in respect of effective participation and profitability of actions of small minority shareholders, and considerable loss of positions of the state as сосубъекта – businesses. Scarce investments of state corporation could find at the expense of the internal accumulation, favorable loan and profitability of production.

Management of economy as complete economic system in the conditions of the market economy which is based on a private property and a personal initiative, certainly, has the features with characteristic regulatory – the administrative relations within the general macroeconomic system. Significantly dependence of national economies and their internal structures on world economic communications and the diverse network relations increases. Public administration by economy in the presence of a large number of the economic subjects making independent administrative decisions proceeding from own strategy, in strict sense appears not as classical management, and economic regulation. This regulation takes the form of a complex combination of a direct control of programs and processes, in a case when the state ownership acts as the subject of management. And generally process of regulation by variety of forms of ownership by subjects of managing of mixed economy accepts various forms of indirect influence. Rigid "management" and softer "regulation" coexist in actions of governmental structures at implementation of economic policy. Such policy assumes existence and realization of publicly declared economic strategy of the country by which all subjects of market economy of the country have to be guided.

For CIS countries, and first of all for Russia and Kazakhstan transition to new system of public administration with radical change of "model of economic growth" towards innovative development and the corresponding orientation of investment activity is characteristic.  The essence of new orientation consists in change of situational regulation of economic processes by management and regulation on the basis of the social and economic strategy, equitable to radical interests of innovative development. 

The system of interests in the conditions of market transformations from "general" or "neutral" property is transformed to system of interests of the mixed forms of ownership. Use of state market mechanisms and regulators consists in supporting this competing among themselves systems of interests unstable balance. In these conditions the most important problem of public administration to achieve at macrolevel of coherence of all integrity scientific and technical, it is innovative - reproduction the processes predetermining integrated efficiency, structural proportionality and social and economic interconditionality of cooperative communications. This strategic objective and task causes need of formation of adequate paradigms of a combination of the state and market regulators, new methodological and standard and legal bases of efficiency of functioning of modern economy on the basis of criteria of superiority of innovative developments.

In formation of new innovative type of economic development and the forced industrialization the big role is played by public administration and the state investments. Removing considerable part of risk, the state gives the chance to the advanced enterprises innovators to realize the scientifically – engineering designs. Programs of stimulation of development of new technological way as bases of innovative type of economic development, form the contents "Strategy-2020" and "Strategy-2030" across Kazakhstan.

For conditions of developing countries, including Post-Soviet, there is a problem of the forced industrialization as objectively necessary stage of catching-up development. The international experience testifies that the countries which had to carry out modernization and restructuring of the economy, showed for a long time high level of investments. In post-war Europe the norm of accumulation (the relation of investments to gross domestic product) up to 1970 made 25%, in Japan for the same period it reached 30%, and in South Korea was even higher. During industrialization in the Soviet Union (as well as in modern China carrying out economy modernization) norm of accumulation exceeded 1/3, reaching 40% of gross domestic product. In Russia for 2020 it is planned to come to norm of accumulation of 35% at rather low level of 20-25% for today. The Russian economists point to the missed opportunities for a conclusion of Russia to a trajectory of effective innovative development. "The natural rent which is forming at the expense of export of energy carriers and raw materials in volume of 60 bln. dollars a year, wasn't used for economy restructuring on a new technological basis and left on repayments of an external debt, accumulation of Stabilization fund and other forms of export of the capital abroad. Thus the Russian economy remained nedomonetizirovanny, the volume of investment doesn't exceed ¼ volumes, minimum necessary level of needs of reproduction.

In China reproduction of the production capital independent of external factors is provided; the industrial capital dominates undividedly, the country developed broad neoindustrialization. It is protected (according to plan – system image) from domination of the "fictitious" capital. The yuan and economic system are independent of dollar. Excessive openness of export and raw model of growth of Russia and Kazakhstan couldn't provide protection against destruction of world financial crisis. China with its huge industrial export appeared out of crisis of dollarization and continues forward development with record for crisis and the post-crisis period indicators: for 2009 growth of gross domestic product reached 8,6%, and in 2010 - exceeded 9%. Recession of the Russian economy in 2009 appeared the deepest among G-8 countries − 8,7% of size gross domestic product. A number of the Russian economists believe that the oligarchical private property in Russia isn't able to provide neither innovative, nor neoindustrial modernization. The modern large property, in their opinion, is insufficiently legitimate in the basis. The economic relations on means and the results of the production which have developed as a result of extra legal raider mechanisms of gripping privatization of state property created not zealous owners, and the self-interested new subjects of property focused on an environment of the external prices and assignment of a natural rent from exported raw materials. In this regard consider reasonable and necessary carrying out the return process – deprivatization in economy: "It is time to finish the phenomena of destruction to pass to a creation stage, and for this purpose large sectors of economy have to be in state ownership that will allow to solve much more successfully national problems without which joining of Russia to the leading countries" isn't possible. Thus developed self-interested oligarchical economic system is offered to be replaced cardinally new – it is state - corporate with macro-level regulation.

Kazakhstan, developing according to the similar scenario with Russia, at high growth rates of gross domestic product in 9-10% for pre-crisis decade as couldn't overcome a striking distortion in technological and branch structure of economy. Thus Russia and Kazakhstan have considerable gold - currency reserves in 518 and 70 billion dollars respectively for June 1, 2011. (Russia on reserves takes the third position in the world) that is solid investment potential for more resolute intervention in process of neoindustrial modernization. Time of hobby monetary regulators passed: problems of turning on of the mechanism according to plan - the centralized concentration of real resources (both external, and internal) on the priority directions of structural and innovative break are urgent.

At a stage of recovery from the crisis and implementation of the Program of the forced industrialization in Kazakhstan, Programs-2020 in Russia the problem of increase of a role of the state in development and realization of strategy of economic growth and providing a course of economic transformation objectively moves forward. The oligarchical elite with its mercenary purposes constrains implementation of the new concept of transformation of economy and doesn't allow radical turn of investments towards real economy. This contradiction can be overcome on ways of integration of property, both state, and private, combinations of external and internal accumulation, establishments of state and corporate system of economy. Achievement of an organic combination, symbiosis of forms of ownership, especially in the leading directions of industrial and innovative development with a priority of state strategic interests in the conditions of market functioning of economy appears as objective regularity of progress of all developing countries at historically critical stages of their progress. Achievement of a share of state ownership to level of the developed countries has to be evolutionary. In the created conditions the state can be the real force, capable to provide concentration of resources on the key directions of neoindustrial modernization of economy and technological break only. It especially urgently when in world economy in the conditions of globalization of the politician of a pushing off of the developing countries especially rich with raw material resources on position of raw tanks of the developed markets more and more goes deep and hopes of overcoming of this gap at the developed international division of labor actually aren't present. Especially, at a turn of XX and XXI centuries the world civilization entered a new stage of the development, a stage of neoindustrial economy with the leading role of a human factor. New innovative factors as intellectualization, a computerization, informatization of processes and spheres entirely define the contents, driving forces and features of each of branches of economy, comprehensive neoindustrial development.

For last two decades the advanced countries developed in line with the fifth technological way of scientific and technical progress, and the CIS country, including Russia and Kazakhstan everything is more obvious lagging behind in industrial and innovative development, were fixed in a role of raw appendages of the developed and quickly progressing developing countries. For this period the new industrial countries (NIC), especially China, India, Brazil, Malaysia, Vietnam, etc. at active economic policy of the state achieved considerable results. According to experts, high innovative activity according to the FIIR RK Program is possible only at is clear to the expressed industrial strategy of the state. Post-crisis restoration and revival of economy has to depend not on dynamics of the world prices for raw materials, and on modernization on a basis industrially – innovative strategy with an exit to new technologies.

In the developed states of the world new technologies provide to 85% of a gain of gross domestic product. The volume of the world market of the knowledge-intensive production exceeds 12,6% of one trillion dollars. To 36% of this sum – a share of the USA, 30 Japan, 9,5 - Germany, 6% - China. The share of Russia makes 0,3%. And the specific weight of the knowledge-intensive production in a total amount of the Russian export doesn't exceed 1,5-2%. The share of the innovation-active enterprises in Russia doesn't exceed 10%.

For today Russia and Kazakhstan are in the beginning of a way to innovative economy. Share of expenses for science in gross domestic product of these countries respectively don't exceed 05 and 0,24% whereas over the developed countries these standards reach 3-4% of gross domestic product. In this regard urgently to lead levels of science funding, education and health care to the international standards (across Kazakhstan science funding level by 2014 is planned to be lifted to 1% of gross domestic product) and as to increase norms of accumulation to level of the high-growth countries. While the new scientific equipment, the latest technologies are provided with import. Dependence of the domestic scientific sphere on the outside world puts our countries in a dependency. Problem of diversification of production and its technological updating - the major without which decision it is impossible to increase national competitiveness. Hi-tech production and "economy of knowledge" - the main content of neoindustrialization where in economy structure leading situation passes to branches of science and the hi-tech industry. Task – gross domestic product building by any ways, and radical change of its structure isn't simple. All types of economic activity and not only the industry have to become hi-tech. In strategy of the developed countries growth rates processing are differentiated and extracting kinds of activity, reduction of toplivoyemky, ecologically harmful productions is provided, measures for development of biotechnologies in various branches and spheres are taken. As the general supporting and stimulating framework of these all-embracing system measures the active scientific and technical and structural policy of the state appears. It has to have basic fundamental science which is necessary to be first of all the course of world opening, to increase own development in various fields of knowledge and creations of personnel potential for applied research and development. The government and its institutes have to be capable to develop and pursue modernization policy in unity of all its components as for own development of the country, and upholding of the state interests in the conditions of the global competition. "At this conjuncture the exit to a trajectory of steady growth of economy and welfare of society is possible only on the basis of effectively operating public sector, with concentration of efforts on the breakthrough directions of formation of new technological way, cardinal increase of innovative activity, improvement of quality and defining influence of state regulation, lifting of labor and creative activity of people".

1.5 . Overcoming of export and raw model of development of the countries of "catching-up development" and transition to a new stage of industrial growth

The mobilization type of economic growth when problems of catching-up and overtaking development are purposefully solved, is especially characteristic for a number of large and average developing economy. This phenomenon which has received especially intensive character in the last third of XX and the beginning of the XXI century, amplified in the conditions of a world economic crisis when the developed economy underwent the greatest destruction. The accelerated restoration of economic capacity of Asia at the end of XX and the beginning of the XXI century began with Japan, then moved to South Korea, further to South East Asia (since Singapore and Malaysia). Now restoration is focused on China, and it more and more involves India, lifting during this process of one hundred millions people of poverty. In 2010 China pressed Japan, having become the second-large economy in the world. According to analysts of GoldmanSachs investment bank, the total amount of the Chinese economy will exceed the volume of economy of the USA by 2027. But believing that after 2030 the Chinese growth of gross domestic product will make 6%, and the USA – 2%, come to a conclusion that the People's Republic of China won't be made even to the USA in size of the income per capita – this more exact definition of level of economy – approximately to the second half of the current century. Developing countries, as a rule, receive benefits from the imported technologies at early stages of economic development, but rates of their growth are slowed down when they reach higher stages of growth. According to J. S. Nye, professors of Harvard, "… many present forecasts based only on growth of gross domestic product, too одномерны … Among the range of possible options of the future the most probable scenarios are that the People's Republic of China will overtake the USA the money, but won't surpass them in the general power in the first half of this eyelid. Similarly by StandardChartered estimates, China by 2020 will overtake the USA and becomes the largest economy of the world. By 2030. the Chinese economy will exceed economy of the USA twice and 24% of world production will is the share of it. India will overtake Japan and becomes the third by the size world economy.

Comparative stability of economy developed and developing countries to destructive influence of a world economic crisis, volatility of their economy depending on degree of a mobilizovannost of resources was visually shown 2007-2010.

Country

GDP on PPS of the world. USD

Gain of real GDP, %

2007

2008

2009

Diff

(2009-2007)

USA

13808

2,1

0,4

-2.4

-4,5

China

7035

13,1

9,0

8,7

-4,3

Japan

4295

2,4

-1,2

-5,2

-7,6

Germany

2812

2,5

1,3

-5,0

-7,5

India

2997

9,9

6,3

5,7

-4,2

Great Breatan

2168

2,6

0,5

-5,0

-7,6

France

2068

2,3

0,3

-2,2

-4,5

Russia

2090

8,1

5,6

-7,9

-16,0

Italy

1788

1,5

-1,0

-4,9

-6,4

Brazil

1837

6,1

5,1

-0,2

-6,3

Spain

1352

3,6

0,9

-3,6

-7,2

Mexico

1486

3,3

1,3

-6,5

-9,8

Canada

1270

2,5

0,4

-2,6

-5,1

S. Korea

1202

5,1

2,2

0,2

-4,9

Iran

757

7,8

2,3

1,8

-6,0

Indonesia

838

6,3

6,0

4,5

-1,8

Australia

768

4,9

2,2

1,4

-3,5

Taiwan

696

5,6

0,7

-1,9

-7,5

Netherlands

648

3,6

2,0

-4,0

-7,6

Turkey

886

4,7

0,9

-4,7

-9,4

Poland

622

6,8

5,0

1,7

-5,1

Saudi Arabia

555

3,3

4,5

0,2

-3,1

Thailand

520

4,9

2,5

-2,3

-7,2

Argentina

524

8,7

6,8

0,9

-7,8

S. Africa

467

5,5

3,7

-1,8

-7,3

The recession which has begun at the end of 2007 in the USA after bankruptcy of LemanBrothersосенью bank of 2008 gained global character. On many parameters it became the most serious since the Great depression of the 30th years. Among the leading countries instability of the Russian economy surpassed expectations, especially against 24 largest economy of the world. The country appeared "leader" on depth of recession of annual gross domestic product (-7,96 2009). In other countries decrease in gross domestic product was less (usually on 2-3 items, and in a number of the countries even three times: in China for 8,7%, in India – on 5,7, in Indonesia – on 4,5, in Australia, Iran, Poland – on 1,4-1,7, in South Korea, Saudi to Arabia and Argentina – for 0,2-0,9%. In nine largest countries from 25 world crisis at all I didn't lead to falling of annual gross domestic product.

Even more visually depth of crisis is shown in "difference" of rates of gross domestic product – a difference between the maximum crisis rate of falling (in 2009) and the maximum pre-crisis growth rate (in 2007) at Russia difference of annual rates made – 16.п.п. (decrease in gross domestic product for 7,9% in 2009, a minus of growth by 8,1% in 2007), and in Mexico and Turkey which took the second and third place on this indicator, it was 1,5 times less (respectively – 9,8 and-9,4 items)

World crisis more or less successfully overcame not only China, as the country of mobilization economic growth, but also some other which are carried to the countries – exporters of oil, gas, etc. natural raw materials.

Country

Oil export (2007)

Oil production (2008)

thousand/barrel

day

Saudi Arabia

8728

10786

Russia

6845

9756

Iran

2719

4122

UAE

2700

3071

Canada

2421

3302

Norway

2383

2460

Kuwait

2349

2748

Nigeria

2327

2168

Venezuela

2182

2674

Mexico

1986

3241

Algeria

1891

2177

Iraq

1830

2371

GB

1602

1661

Libya

1542

1911

USA

1433

8709

Angola

1407

2037

Kazakhstan

1313

1460

Qatar

1043

1203

World

85692

Canada, Norway, Great Britain, Nigeria, Mexico at the first signs of crisis (in the first half of 2008) reduced oil production, and after its sharp aggravation in the fall of 2008 in addition it lowered. The OPEC countries in the first half of 2008 when the oil prices quickly grew, actively increased production, seeking to slow down a rise in prices and at the same time to use market conditions. And in the first half of 2009 when prices of oil fell, they, on the contrary, reduced production that promoted stabilization of the prices. At last, the third group includes Russia, the USA, Kazakhstan and Iran which increase production and export. These countries (except for the USA which poorly depend on oil export, it is rather – from its import) seek to take out the maximum volume of oil at any price level.

Existence of considerable natural resources didn't cause economic recession. Falling of the prices (oil) at the end of 2008 – the beginning of 2009 was short-term. On the contrary, rather stable external demand for oil and oil products supported economy of these countries. For Russia the main reason was small diversification of export (narrow specialization), poor quality of institutes (security of the property rights), an economy overheat that was shown in unfairly high growth rates of real estate prices, on an action, rates of the credits, housing cost, volatility of rates in construction. As a whole the world economy experienced considerable recession since the Great depression of the 30th years. According to estimates, the size of world gross domestic product for 2008-2010 was reduced by 2,3%, the volume of world trade – for 9,4%. Decline in production was characteristic first of all for the developed parties where the financial markets were overflowed with the fictitious capital. In the USA falling of gross domestic product reached 2,5%, in Japan – 5,4%, the European Union – 3,9%. Among developing countries the greatest losses were suffered by countries of Eastern Europe where reduction in production reached 6%. From G-20 countries the indicator of falling of gross domestic product was maximum in Russia: Gross domestic product in 2009 decreased by 7,9%, industrial production – for 9,3%, investments – for 16,2%, unemployment grew by a third, the volume of export was reduced by 35,5%.

Recession was characteristic and for economy of Kazakhstan. Crisis as a whole revealed insufficient stability of raw structure, instability of the forced growth of economy for the first decades of a new eyelid, its complete dependence from an environment of the world raw markets. It was visually shown in dynamics of the prices of crude oil, metals and other rare-earth resources and the corresponding reaction of indicators of gross domestic product of the industry. Gross domestic product growth for 2000-2008 both across Russia, and across Kazakhstan was provided in a defining measure at the expense of petrodollars. The analysis showed that 0,9% of a gain of the prices of raw export are the share of 1% of a gain of gross domestic product in 2000-2008. According to the Russian economists, cumulative growth of gross domestic product of our countries by 90% is caused by inflation of petrodollars, and therefore is bestovarny, fictitious. It is indicative, devaluation of the national currencies losing a commodity basis and a real course, took place almost at the same time in 2008-2009. In the years of crisis of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan had to go on creation of anti-recessionary fund (10 bln. dollars) to maintain internal cooperation relations. In the structural analysis of external and internal factors of an annual gain of gross domestic product by calculations Akkad. A.G.Aganbegyana, from an annual gain of gross domestic product of 7% that was characteristic for economy of Russia of the poreformenny period, about 4% is the share of influence of growth of the export prices and additional inflow of currency to the country and only 3% of economic growth is provided at the expense of internal sources and factors. The norm of accumulation of the capital (level of investments) in Russia during the pre-crisis period didn't exceed 10-13%, and in China at 8-10% growth rates it reached 30-40%. The revealed trend of sources of economic growth was characteristic and for syryevidny economy of Kazakhstan.

Mastering by crisis destruction and gradual financial stabilization demanded from the largest countries of the world of big financial expenses. Expenses of the governments of the developed countries since September, 2008 made 18 trillion dollars (30% of world gross domestic product). They were used for recapitalization of banks and receiving shares in the capital of the financial institutions experiencing crisis, and as for granting guarantees on bank deposits and other assets. Except purely monetary and financial measures for prevention of the recessions, many countries accepted plans of financial stimulation of economic activity for total amount about 26 trillion dollars. They reflect the huge scale of expenses from bodies of macroeconomic management on consolidation of leading economy of the world for maintenance of economic balance that testifies to a high capital intensity of stabilization measures.

In Kazakhstan in the 2000th years thanks to an environment of a foreign market it was provided high the gross domestic product loudspeaker, the population standard of living raised, before crisis by fall of 2008 macroeconomic and financial stability was provided. Improvements in the basic happened thanks to high staple prices, the country continued to develop on the basis of export and raw model.

The economic model according to the scheme "raw materials export – a basis of the income of the budget and the population" blocks the competition, doesn't allow to grow full-scale to domestic business. Such model is characteristic for many countries having rich stocks of raw material resources. The main source of wealth in raw economy – not productive work, and the natural rent realized through export of raw materials (or products of its primary processing), distribution of the income from which is transformed to growth of consumer internal demand. At the expense of raw branches the infrastructure of the country and the sphere so-called "not traded" branches, production and which services can't be replaced with import are invested. Trade, construction, transport, communication services concerns to them and other. All other requirements of domestic market are satisfied at the expense of import. In these conditions the economy strongly depends on an environment of the world commodity markets; as her main subjects the state and the large raw companies (national and multinational corporation branches) act; domestic market is characterized by low level of the competition, the economy generally copes in "a manual mode".

The increased demand against recovery of world economy was the main factor of influence on the oil market, mining raw materials both industrial metals, and other raw materials which generally provided a rise in prices in 2010. Besides, in the conditions of remaining uncertainty in the financial markets oil and metals became some kind of new financial asset where investors invested money with I aim to earn big profit, than in the financial markets. Anyway, prices of oil already more than in one and a half time exceeded the level put in the budget of Kazakhstan for 2010-2012 and more than for 20% - an average value of 2010. The high prices are certainly rather favorable to the countries of exporters of raw materials. Because economy growth is accelerated, the budget deficit is reduced, the international reserves (by November, 2011 they exceeded 70 bln. dollars) grow, the rate of national currency (tenge) raises.

As a whole the excessive rise in prices for raw materials at their relative benefit for the export countries is represented a factor, capable to break the balanced development of world economy, to cause solvent crisis of budgets of the countries of consumers, especially at a stage of post-crisis revival and restoration. So, according to experts of the International power agency, such threat arises at a rise in prices for oil higher than 95 dollars for barrel. Russian and a number of experts of developing countries, on the contrary, adheres to other point of view of rather top level of prices of oil. So, the director of the Center of researches of post-industrial society V.Inozemtsev considers that "… price of oil within 100-120 dollars. for barrel … and its fixing in one range hardly poses serious threat … Rise in prices for oil will stimulate technological innovations, development of alternative energy sources … Taking into account that economy of the leading countries becomes less volatile, increase of price of oil to 120 and even 160 dollars for barrel won't kill the western economy, and will make them more effective and creative. How justified there will be these points of view in case of continuation of a rise in prices will show time.

The favorable external environment for export goods against recovery of world economy (a rise in prices for hydrocarbons, mining raw materials and metallurgical production) provided the accelerated exit of the republic from crisis. In 2010 growth of gross domestic product reached 7% that exceeded rates of all other CIS countries indicators of growth of economy on which made from 2,6 to 6,5%. Actually within one year indicators of gross domestic product not only in dollar measurement, but also per capita, significantly exceeded level of 2008. Improvement of economy was provided at the expense of growth of raw export. Thus additional internal demand is satisfied in many respects at the expense of import. The share of manufacturing industry made 17,4% of gross domestic product, and for a share of the mining 33,5% fall. On agency classification according to RK, production of ore is referred to mining, and production of metals – semi-finished products − to processing branch. In our statistics there is no rather certain definition of concepts "branch structure", "real economy" "processing" the industry. Metallurgical holdings, without letting out production of final repartition and multiplying raw export, applies for investments and are interested only in export of metals on foreign iron and steel works for completion of the fourth repartition and release of end products at realization of a value added and all "margin" in the country accepting taken out "metallurgical raw materials". At such statistics diversification is overestimated, and industrial programs and investments not quite reflect real modernization. The serious, not engaged statistics on the differentiated definition of branches and spheres of processing, real sector with an exit to production of final consumption is necessary. At a real cost assessment of an industrial output the prevailing share is the share of extracting sector. The oil and gas industry and metallurgy provide 75% of export of the country. In view of lack of clear split into "raw repartition" and "end products" are retouched an overall picture and the end products are artificially overestimated.

At a recovery from the crisis stage positive dynamics of the prices of hydrocarbons and metals, mining raw materials predetermined rather high dynamics of economy of Kazakhstan. By estimates of the international centers and the financial organizations, the positive trend of the world market will remain and during the forthcoming medium-term period that has to determine positive economic country growth. Kazakhstan, as well as Russia need full-scale system modernization that to 2020 and 2030 to completely change structure of the industry, export, domestic market, infrastructure. Diversified private business, as the chief agent of future modernization is urged to manage it first of all. It is impossible to raise significantly a share of non-oil sector in gross domestic product without the sharp growth of enterprise activity, large-scale sources of investments, advanced technologies of production. In a complex to solve these problems it is necessary to attract actively direct production investments that in the conditions of strengthening of processes of globalization of commodity markets and the capital and adverse investment climate during the post-crisis period very difficult. Without cardinal improvement of conditions of business successful, socially safe, large-scale modernization is impossible. Especially the state role in realization of new industrial policy, in development of new sectors of the economy raises, able to become engines of acceleration of growth rates of economy.

In this plan radical change of raw model of economic growth with the industrial and innovative appeared for Kazakhstan and Russia and all CIS countries urgently ripened problem. Without the accelerated, large-scale solution of problems of new industrialization over the Post-Soviet states real threat to remain the underdeveloped dependent periphery hung. In January, 2010 in Kazakhstan the state program of the forced industrial and innovative development for 2010-2014 which is organic part of the strategic programs "Kazakhstan-2020" and "Kazakhstan — 2030" was accepted. The FIIR RK new Program appears as a real basis of modernization of structure of national economy and versatile growth of the industry. High the gross domestic product loudspeaker from average annual 7% rate of a gain for 2010-2014. has to lean on the healthy base, complex development of economy, increase in production not only in export-oriented raw productions, but also processing spheres of real economy. In it the positive effect of the new Program has to affect. The task to change economic model of Kazakhstan, to pass from an extensive and raw orientation to industrial innovatively development is set. For this reason FIIR are defined by Gosprogramma accurate priorities: increase of productivity and competitiveness of national economy; attraction of investments and creation of new export-oriented hi-tech productions; development and strengthening of national innovative system; strengthening of small and medium business in the course of industrialization; rational spatial organization of economic potential. As the branches providing diversification and growth of competitiveness are allocated:

- development of branches on the basis of internal demand (mechanical engineering, pharmaceutical industry, the construction industry and the industry of construction materials);

- support of the branches having an export potential (agrarian and industrial complex, light industry, tourist branch. ) ;

- sector development "Future economy" (information and communication technologies, biotechnology, space activity, alternative power engineering, nuclear power);

- development of a mineral and raw complex.

By estimates of the international experts and the centers (the UN, WB, IMF, the European Reconstruction and Development Bank, etc.), the positive trend of the world market on export-oriented branches of the republic predetermines favorable nature of its economic growth.

Following the results of realization of FIIR growth of gross domestic product by 50% from level of 2008, labor productivity increase in processing sector for 50% is expected by 2014. To the same term finishing of a share of non-oil sector to 40% from total exports, increase to 10% of a share of the innovative enterprises is planned. Basic essence of Strategic programs of social and economic growth "2020" and "2030" - not quantitative growth in itself, and the new quality of growth providing modernization, wellbeing of the people, an innovation, integration within the HARDWARE and EurAsEC. According to the statement of the President of RK, by the beginning of the third decade all conditions for transition of Kazakhstan in number of industrially developed countries of the world will be created.

The made state decisions on the FIIR RK Program have to mark the beginning of a new stage of state regulation of economy: for the first time for many years of market reforms the system of planned documents and the long-term plan of strategic policy of the state is formed: growth of volumes of gross domestic product, labor productivity, increase of a share of middle class, reduction of mortality and life expectancy increase which are based on ensuring break in social and economic and innovative and technological development and actions for a republic conclusion in number of fifty developed competitive countries of the world. To intensive development of processing branches and productions process of change of model of economic development with strengthening of factors of innovative growth and target investment activity, ensuring new quality of development of economy has to reflect consecutive overcoming of one-sided raw development of economy and transition objectively. Thus the human development, leaning on qualitatively new lifting of an education system, full support of science has to become a leading priority of the state in practice. Only on this basis transition to model of society and the economy based on knowledge and their hi-tech materialization, the corresponding neoindustrial era is possible. Only on this basis the country will be freed from present reality when "society and pipe economy" function as a raw appendage not only developed, but also developing countries, such as China, India, Turkey, etc. The problem of diversification of production and its technological updating remains to one of the major without which decision it is impossible to increase national competitiveness neither on technological, nor on human potential.

For Kazakhstan, as well as for Russia it is extremely important to achieve step by step competitiveness by final and intermediate types of production in the beginning in domestic market in the competition to identical import goods, at the same time achieving priority positions at the level of the HARDWARE, then and EEP. It is a problem demanding consecutive formation of hi-tech productions and release of qualitative production at the level of the international standards and finding of the niche of sale on regional, and then and world markets. As for a sales market of production of hydrocarbons and metallurgy, they were already created as segments of the market of the multinational corporation which branches function in the republic. Therefore, the organization of the market of these export-oriented products in a bigger measure care of the international marketing independent of the republic of the international market on the basis of supply and demand on limited, scarce types of production of world economy. In the basis the private capital of branches of the leading energy and mining companies of the world disposes of them.

For the republic to form a hi-tech industrial complex it is absolutely not enough to be limited to one-two complexes of high-tech industries. It is necessary to form consistently a number of the complexes corresponding to developed branches of specialization or socially urgent spheres. In other words, it is necessary to create advanced corporate firms with the knowledge-intensive and hi-tech production similar in China, Sweden, Finland, etc. the countries. As these complexes will be focused: on the international, regional or domestic market the environment, capacity of this or that market will define. These issues will be resolved depending on a set of multilevel factors that, finally, will define and forms measures of technological effectiveness, innovation of socially oriented economic growth in the republic. Along with the objective subjective factors from which it would be necessary to distinguish have defining value also:

- innovative policy of the state as the most important component of the state economic policy.

- monetary policy of the organizations acting as investors.

Realization of innovative policy in Kazakhstan is in no small measure connected with DFI (direct foreign investments) and use of borrowed funds that demands the accounting of diverse conditions and consequences, up to the property relations in realized projects and economic safety. Before the country – not simply problem of building of gross domestic product, and thorough change of its structure. All types of economic activity have to become hi-tech. Today representation didn't justify itself that to market economy there correspond indirect economic methods of regulation. Postulate that the free markets – the most effective mechanism of regulation of resources and risks which adhered in the West and the USA nearly a quarter of the century, will reject radically. In October, 2008 the president of France at the summit of leaders of EU told that idea that the markets are always right – mad that idea of non-interference of the state and as the idea of the all-powerful markets died and declared large-scale state support of economy. The idea of support of economy especially is fair and has to enter into strong practice at the level of a state policy at historically critical stages of formation of economy of the Post-Soviet countries, especially during the post-crisis period when in a complex and it is inconsistent strategic tasks forced industrialization and formations of qualitatively new innovative productive forces are realized. This idea especially is actual and urgent in relation to Russia and Kazakhstan where in practice problems of industrialization, diversifications and modernizations are on a substantial scale solved.

[1]Экономист. М., № 9, 2011.

[2]Hullman A. The Economic development of nanotechnology. An indicators based analysis. European Commission. DG Research, 28 November, 2006.

[3]Capota P. Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages. London/ Elgar. 2002.

[4]  В. Иноземцев. Будущее России – в новой индустриализации. Экономист. М., № 11, 2010.

[5]  В. Цветков. Об отправной точке неоиндустриальной модернизации. Экономист. М., № 11. 2010.

[6]По величине ВВП на одного занятого, характеризующей производительность национальной экономики, Россия в 4 раза уступает США и в 3 раза – Европе, а ее доля в мировом экспорте товаров – всего 2,5%. Экономист, М., № 11. 2010. С.17.

[7]Экономист. М., № 11, 2010. С. 19.

[8]С. Губанов. К политике неоиндустриализации России. // Экономист. М., 2009, № 9. С.19-20.

[9]  Голубович АП.Д., Идрисов А.Б., Иноземцев В.Л., Титов Ю.Б., Шпитель М.М. Выход из кризиса: отказ от сырьевой модели. Новая индустриализация. Ежегодный экономический доклад общероссийской общественной организации «Деловая Россия». М., 2009. С. 34, «Экономист», 2009, № 9. С.9.

[10]// Экономист, М., № 9, 2009. С.15-16.

[11]Расч. ПоИПСТАД. The Least  Developed Countriess Report/ The state and Development governance. United Nations. New York and Geneva. 2009.p. 145.

[12]Экономист. М., 2008г., № 9.

[13]С. Губанов. Императив общегосударственных интересов. Экономист. М., № 4, с. 3-4.

[14]В.Наймушин. Постиндустриальные иллюзии или системная «неоиндустриализация»:  выбор современной России. Экономист. М., № 4, 2009. -  С. 29-36.

[15]К.Хубиев. Модернизация и отношения собственности. Экономист. М., 2010, № 9.

[16]Курсивъ. Республиканский деловой еженедельник. 25.03.11.

[17]Экономист. М., 2010, № 9. С. 19.

[18]Экономист. М., № 9, 2010г.

[19]Lane D. Russia’s Asymetric Capitalism in Comparative Perspetive. /Paper Presented at ICSEES VII World Congress, Berlin, Yuly. 2005.

[20]Вопросы экономики. М., 2009г., №5.

[21]Дж. Стиглиц. Глобализация: тревожные тенденции. Р. Кучуков. Государственный сектор как локомотив  модернизации. Экономист. 2010, № 9.

[22]С.Губанов. Императив общегосударственных интересов. Экономист. М., №4, 2009, с. 3.

[23]Д.Сорокин. О стратегии развития России. Вопросы экономики. №8, 2010.

[24]Научная сессия Общего собрания РАН «Научно-технологический прогноз – важнейший элемент стратегии развития России.  Вестник РАН. 2009, т. 29, №3.

[25]Мировой кризис: угрозы России. М.: ИМЭМО РАН. 2009г.

[26]Государство в меняющемся мире. Отчет о мировом развитии. 1997г.  Перевод с английского. Всемирный банк: агентство экономической информации. «Прайм - ТАСС». 1997г.

[27]Рассч. по ст.сб. «Россия и страны мира». М., 2006.

[28]Экономист. М., 2009, № 9.

[29]Белоусов А.Р. Сценарии экономического развития России на 15 летнюю перспективу. Проблемы прогнозирования. 2006, № 1.

Ж. Сапир. Каким должен быть уровень инфляции.  Проблемы прогнозирования. 2006, № 3.

Инвестиционный климат России. Экспертный институт. Вопросы экономики. 2006, № 5.

[30]Р.Кучуков. Государственный сектор как локомотив модернизации экономики. Экономист. М., № 9, 2009.

[31]Экономист. М., № 9, 2010, с. 23.

[32]Экономист. М., №9, 2010.

[33]Джозеф С.Най. Будущее власти. Copyrigt: ProgectSindicate, 2011.  ORG. Перевод с английского, Капитал. Деловой еженедельник. 14.04.2011.

[34]Казахстанская правда. 3.02.2011г.

[35]ITF; OECD; Национальные статические агентства; Расчеты «Центра развития» ГУ-ВШЭ. Вопросы экономики. №6, 2010.

[36]CIA; EIA; IMF. Национальные статические агентства; «Центр развития» ГУ-ВШЭ. Вопросы экономики. №6, 2010г.

[37]С.Губанов. Императив общегосударственных интересов. Экономист. М., №4, 2009г.

[38]Аганбегян А.Г. Инвестиции в стратегии социально-экономического развития. Проблемы модернизации экономики и экономической политики России. 2010г., с.137.

[39]Инвестиции в России. 2007г.  Стат.сб. /Росстат. М.,  2007г., с. 13.

[40]Нути М. Стратегия выхода из кризиса. Мир перемен. 2009г. №4. С. 10.

[41]Деловая неделя. 4.03.2011.

[42]Казахстанская правда. 8.04.11. Инаугурационная речь Президента РК. Н.А.Назарбаева