Prospects for Encouraging Competition in the Public Social Services Market
https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2024-3-154-181
Abstract
The article examines the practice of engaging private providers to deliver public social services in Russia, as well as the legal regulation applicable to those activities. In addition, it outlines the evolution of the legislation and incentives affecting the access of private providers to the public services market, what their actual share in this market is, and the benefits and risks from expanding it. The author’s overall conclusion is that involving private providers to deliver public services is advisable, but it should not be an end in itself. The consequences of this policy for the state budget, public infrastructure, and consumers should be considered. In keeping with this recommendation, the author suggests legislative amendments designed to eliminate artificial incentives for expanding the share of private providers in the public services market while maintaining state control over the volume of financing of the public infrastructure in order to prevent its degradation. The article also analyzes the Russian system for independent assessment of the quality of public services (IQA) which began in 2015 and assesses its suitability for comparing the quality of services from public and private providers. The author finds shortcomings in the IQA methodology, which artificially inflate the overall level of assessments. This becomes a disincentive for providers to improve the quality of their services and also reduces public confidence in the results of IQA. This analysis of IQA is used to generate proposals for improving its methodology by making its results more objective.
Supporting agencies: This article was prepared under the RANEPA State Commission for 2023.
About the Author
A. B. Zolotareva
RANEPA
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anna B. Zolotareva, Cand. Sci. (Law), Deputy Chief of the Budget Policy Research Laboratory, Institute of Applied Economic Research
84, pr. Vernadskogo, Moscow, 119571
References
1. Batkibekov S., Besstremyannaya G., Bolshakova E., Zolotareva A., Shishkin S. Otraslevye, sektoral’nye i regional’nye osobennosti reformy byudzhetnykh uchrezhdeniy v Rossii [Industrial, Sectoral, and Regional Features of the Reform of Budgetary Institutions in Russia]. Moscow, IEPP, 2005. (In Russ.)
2. Batkibekov S., Dezhina I., Zolotareva A., Rozhdestvenskaya I., Kuzyk M., Malginov G., Radygin A., Sinelnikov-Murylev S., Simachev Yu. Povyshenie effektivnosti byudzhetnogo finansirovaniya gosudarstvennykh uchrezhdeniy i upravleniya gosudarstvennymi unitarnymi predpriyatiyami [Increasing the Efficiency of Budget Financing of Government Institutions and Management of State Unitary Enterprises]. Moscow, IEPP, 2003. (In Russ.)
3. Zolotareva A. B. Riski perekhoda k rynochnomu razmeshcheniyu gosudarstvennogo zakaza na okazanie sotsial’nykh uslug [Risks of Transitioning to Market Placement of State Orders for the Provision of Social Services]. Yuridicheskie issledovaniya [Legal Studies], 2018, no. 2, pp. 17-26. DOI: 10.25136/2409-7136.2018.2.21562. (In Russ.)
4. Klyachko T. L., Sinelnikov-Murylev S. G. O reformirovanii sistemy finansirovaniya vuzov [On Reforming the Financing System for Universities]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2012, no. 7, pp. 133-146. DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2012-7-133-146. (In Russ.)
5. Lavrov A. M. Byudzhetnaya reforma v Rossii: ot upravleniya zatratami k upravleniyu rezul’tatami [Budget Reform in Russia: From Managing Costs to Managing Results]. Moscow, KomKniga, 2005. (In Russ.)
6. Lukichev G. A., Filippov V. M. Sistemy finansirovaniya vysshego obrazovaniya v zarubezhnykh stranakh [Financing Systems for Higher Education in Foreign Countries]. Moscow, RUDN, 2008. (In Russ.)
7. Omelyanovskiy V. V., Maksimova L. V., Tatarinov A. P. Zarubezhnyy opyt: modeli finansirovaniya i organizatsii sistem zdravookhraneniya [International Experience: Models for Financing and Organizing Health Care Systems]. Finansovyy zhurnal [Financial Journal], 2014, no. 3, pp. 22-34. (In Russ.)
8. Rudnik B. L., Shishkin S. V., Yakobson L. I. Privatizatsiya v sotsial’no-kul’turnoy sfere: problemy i vozmozhnye formy [Privatization in the Socio-Cultural Sphere: Problems and Possible Forms]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 1996, no. 4, pp. 18-32. (In Russ.)
9. Stepanov I. M. Raspredelenie ob’’emov meditsinskoy pomoshchi v sisteme OMS: regulirovanie i real’nye praktiki [Distribution of the Amount of Medical Care in the Compulsory Medical Insurance System: Regulation and Actual Practices]. Voprosy gosudarstvennogo i munitsipal’nogo upravleniya [Public Administration Issues], 2023, no. 2, pp. 74-102. DOI: 10.17323/1999-5431-2023-0-2-74-102. (In Russ.)
10. Chernets V. A., Chirikova A. E., Shishkin S. V., Belyakov S. A., Potapchik S. V., Soro - chkin B. Yu., Rubinshteyn A. Ya. Finansovye aspekty reformirovaniya otrasley sotsial’noy sfery [Financial Aspects of Reforming Sectors in the Social Sphere]. Moscow, IEPP, 2003. (In Russ.)
11. Shatalov S. S. Byudzhetnoe finansirovanie chastnykh shkol v stranakh OESR [Budgetary Financing of Private Schools in OECD Countries]. Finansovoe pravo [Financial Law], 2018, no. 12, pp. 44-46. (In Russ.)
12. Boeskens L. Regulating Publicly Funded Private Schools: A Literature Review on Equity and Effectiveness, OECD Education Working Papers no. 147, 2016. DOI: 10.1787/5jln6jcg80r4-en.
13. Policies and Practices for Successful Schools. In: PISA 2015: Results (Vol. II). Paris, OECD Publishing, 2016. DOI: 10.1787/9789264267510-en.
14. Public and Private Schools: How Management and Funding Relate to Their Socio-Economic Profile. Paris, OECD Publishing, 2012. DOI: 10.1787/9789264175006-en.
Review
For citations:
Zolotareva A.B. Prospects for Encouraging Competition in the Public Social Services Market. Economic Policy. 2024;19(3):154-181. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2024-3-154-181
Views:
629
Email this article 