Nevertheless, all other indicators are the highest among Volga regions, which means that this region is the most attractive for investors in terms of “soft” factors.

2. The range of values for Samara region is of the utmost interest for the analysis. Taking the overall second place in the rating, Samara region narrowly miss the highest ratings of certain indicators. The only indicator having a very significant impact for Tatarstan to be the first is the indicator “available infrastructure for investors”, where the total number of infrastructure objects is 14. Infrastructure objects in Samara region represent all three categories: industrial parks, SEZs, and technological parks. This means that for any investor this region can provide an appropriate infrastructure. The task is to operate them effectively.

Concerning human capital, Samara region have excellent educative characteristics and migration rates, which has a positive impact on region's labor supply.

Another affecting factor is the “region assistance capacity”, which includes financial independence, GRP per capita and fixed assets depreciation rate indicators. Samara region has only 13% of federal budget transfers in total budget revenues against 19% of Tatarstan rate for this indicator. This means that Samara is financially independent of federal government, and its revenues, for the most part, remain in the region and do not transfer to the federal budget.

The GRP per capita is also very high. However, concerning the last indicator, the overall percentage of obsolete fixed assets in Samara region is 53,5%, which attends to a very untoward situation in the region. The most suffering from depreciated assets economic activity in Samara region is manufacturing industry. The fixed capital renovation is an expensive and time-consuming work; however, it must be of high priority in Samara region.

3. There is a major problem with available infrastructure for investors in many regions of Volga federal district, such as Mari El Republic, Udmurtia Republic, Perm Territory, Kirov Region and Orenburg Region. They have neither industrial or technological parks nor special economic zones for investors. This is the reason why their ratings in Expert RA research remain steady for the last five years (see this rating in Annex 2). Developing infrastructure objects should be on the front burner of regional investment policy for these regions, as investors highly appreciate the existence of prepared sites for their businessesWhile studying at a bachelor degree in the NRU Higher School of Economics in 2013, I was lucky to hear a whole lecture of a Japanese investor in Russia Iwao Ohashi about the Russian investment climate and ways to improve it. In his lecture, he indicated some important factors of the IC for an investor first coming to the Russian market. Among those factors, Mr.Ohashi laid special emphasis on the availability of infrastructure in the form of industrial sites with conducted electricity and heating networks and other core communications. There are not so many examples of matching these criteria objects in Russia (however, it was in 2013 and now the situation slightly changed). The investor pointed out that if Russia had a reasonably large choice of such an investment sites, Japanese investors would have competed for getting such an opportunity, because many of them really want to join the Russian market for years..

A more detailed study on Orenburg region showed that this region has a good potential for growth as almost all indicators outperform the middle value in Volga federal district. It means that human capital in this region can meet the needs of foreign investors, and moreover, the region has good assistance capacity and stands along with Bashkortostan, Nizhny Novgorod, and Samara regions. The only weak point that distorts its attractiveness is the lack of available infrastructure. Thus, to attract foreign investors, Orenburg region should build at least one investment site. The least expensive of all would be greenfield industrial park.

4. One of the most representative examples of Auty's “resource curse” is the Perm Territory. The major share (48,7%) of the regional economic activity occupies mining (17,3%) and manufacturing production (31,4%).

The Expert RA rating for these region shows that is has medium potential and medium risk, the same as Tatarstan had in 2011. However, in Perm there have not been any changes of this rating from 2009. My rating shows that Perm Territory has a few very strong, weak points that have to be taken into consideration by its regional authorities. First, is the “human capital” factor, by which Perm Territory get the last place among all other regions of Volga federal district. The reason for this is the lack of higher educational institutions for various specialties in this region and the ineffectiveness of the management system. Another major problem is the crime. Perm Territory has the highest crime rates among Volga regions accounting 2150 crimes per 100,000 population in 2013. More importantly, for the last ten years Perm Territory remained the most criminal regions of all Volga regions. Such numbers show that carried out crime reducing policy in this region does not have significant outcomes.

5. Mari El Republic took almost all last positions in the analysis of “soft” factors. It is the beneficiary region with an extremely high poverty level (19,5%). All indicator's values are very low, so I cannot even find the areas for growth as all of them require huge financial expenditures, which this region cannot afford. Perhaps the analysis of “hard” factors will show some of the potentials of Mari El Republic. This region is more than others need foreign capital for economic growth.

6. In terms of investment climate, there are two very promising regions - Ulyanovsk Region and the Republic of Bashkortostan. These two regions with overall “soft” factors rating 0,43 and 0,40 respectively have virtually the same weak spots concerning their investment climates. The uppermost problem for both regions is innovative development. The industrial parks and special economic zones in these regions focus mostly on manufacturing and logistics while focus on innovations will gain a significant impact on their investment climates (concerning the previous experience of Tatarstan Republic).

The next step of the statistical analysis is oriented on “hard” factors of the investment climate. The analysis is presented in Tables 6 and 7.

Table 6. The analysis of “hard” factors of investment attractiveness

Factor	Weight	Indicator	Bashkortostan Republic	Mari El Republic	Mordovia Republic	Tatarstan Republic	Udmurtia Republic	Chuvashia Republic	Perm Territory	Kirov Region	Nizhny Novgorod Region	Orenburg Region	Penza Region	Samara Region	Saratov Region	Ulyanovsk Region
Geographic location	20 %	Population (thousands, 2013)	4070	688	812	3838	1517	1240	2636	1311	3281	2009	1361	3211	2497	1268
		Number of cities with a million-plus population within 500 km from region	6	1	2	4	3	3	2	1	3	2	2	3	3	3
		Number of international transportation corridors (ITC): primary and alternative routes	2 Bashkortostan international transportation corridors: international airport Ufa.	1 Mari El international transportation corridors: river Volga.	0	6 Tatarstan international transportation corridors: ITC “North-South”, ITC “East-West”, ITC “Western Europe - Western China”, river Volga, international airports Kazan and Nizhnekamsk.	0	2 Chuvashia international transportation corridors: international airport Cheboksary and river Volga.	3 Perm international transportation corridors: ITC “Trans sib”, river port, international airport Perm.	0	2 Nizhny Novgorod international transportation corridors: international airport Nizhny Novgorod and river Volga.	2	0	4 Samara international transportation corridors: ITC “North-South”, ITC “Trans sib”, river Volga, international airport Samara.	3 Saratov international transportation corridors: international airport Saratov, Kazakhstan border, river Volga.	3 Ulyanovsk international transportation corridors: international airports Ulyanovsk Central and Ulyanovsk East, river Volga.
		The shortest distance to the nearest border-crossing point (km)	250	1050	670	430	830	700	750	950	880	0	540	190	300	440
Normalized index on the factor “Geographic location”	0,64	0,29	0,22	0,74	0,36	0,39	0,5	0,27	0,58	0,23	0,23	0,50	0,43	0,37
Environmental resources	30 %	Amount of converted wood (million cubic metres, 2014)	821,2	203,8	125,0	198,0	328,0	71,4	1632,0	1182,1	573,6	71,7	150,3	100,2	66,8	168
		Total land area (thousand km)	14294,7	2337,5	2612,8	6784,7	4206,1	1834,3	16023,6	12037,2	7662,4	12370,2	4335,2	5356,5	10124,0	3718,1
		Farming land (thousand hectares)	7333,9	774,7	1656,2	4538,0	1844,4	1035,4	2840,5	3320,5	3112,1	10818,5	3041,3	3999,5	8554,2	2207,9
Normalized index on the factor “Environmental resources”	0,67	0,04	0,06	0,27	0,15	0,01	0,74	0,56	0,32	0,58	0,15	0,197	0,45	0,11
Labour market	20 %	Average monetary income per capita (rubles per month, 2013)	23892	14517	14433	26161	18660	15264	26054	18012	24503	18628	17815	26865	16035	18580
		Labor force participation rate (%, 2013)	65	68,6	70,8	70,1	71,5	70,4	66,6	66,6	69,8	69,2	65,8	69,3	64,6	67,9
		Unemployment rate (%, 2013)	1,2	0,8	0,8	0,9	1,0	0,7	1,5	1,3	0,5	1,2	1,0	0,9	0,9	0,5
Normalized index on the factor “Labour market”	0,199	0,76	0,87	0,48	0,72	0,86	0,12	0,40	0,65	0,54	0,47	0,43	0,49	0,71
Domestic market features	15 %	Percentage of innovative goods, works and services (of total volume, 2013)	6,2	2,2	23,9	21,1	4,8	12,0	16,7	6,8	18,1	1,4	7,5	22,9	3,9	15,1
		Number of personally owned vehicles (per thousand, 2013)	245	196,7	234,3	250,1	250,5	185,1	258,5	239,5	269,8	298,1	276,4	285	280,3	243,9
		Manufacturing activity (million rubles, 2013)	961320	77450	106093	1060483	190641	128289	783008	135852	943843	192004	128127	780879	242266	164837
		Extraction of commercial minerals (million rubles, 2013)	146854	384	185	367108	133616	633	209238	848	1741	420880	649	186506	20374	10212
		Retail turnover (million rubles, 2013)	721818	63780	63014	712967	177486	119868	453295	149229	539844	240773	161842	558547	267193	148304
		Actual final consumption per capita (rubles, 2012)	230066,2	138265,5	124630,6	261166,0	167503,2	145573,5	232215,6	162714,3	216595,6	174209,5	162598,7	230211,3	155141,8	162146,5
Normalized index on the factor “Domestic market features”	0,63	0,04	0,24	0,88	0,28	0,13	0,65	0,199	0,63	0,46	0,26	0,75	0,28	0,27
Transport and Communications Infrastructure	15 %	Number of active subscribers of fixed broadband internet (thousands)	763,0	102,9	101,3	930,1	295,1	118,4	306,4	233,7	692,6	333,3	233,7	643,4	438,1	222,0
		Railway density rate (km per 10000 km2, 2013)	102	65	208	129	185	230	98	91	158	117	191	256	228	187
		Motor transport cargo turn-over (millions ton-km, 2013)	3609	651	1667	5361	1706	857	3073	1408	2547	1184	1685	3939	2203	2126
Normalized index on the factor “Transport and Communications Infrastructure”	0,54	0,0006	0,32	0,778	0,36	0,309	0,312	0,15	0,53	0,222	0,346	0,78	0,53	0,366

Green and red marks testify the best and the worst values of indicators for investors.



Table 7. The results of “hard” investment climate factors analysis

	Bashkortostan Republic	Mari El Republic	Mordovia Republic	Tatarstan Republic	Udmurtia Republic	Chuvashia Republic	Perm Territory	Kirov Region	Nizhny Novgorod Region	Orenburg Region	Penza Region	Samara Region	Saratov Region	Ulyanovsk Region
Normalized index on the factor “Geographic location”	0,64	0,29	0,22	0,74	0,36	0,39	0,5	0,27	0,58	0,23	0,23	0,50	0,43	0,37
Normalized index on the factor “Environmental resources”	0,67	0,04	0,06	0,27	0,15	0,01	0,74	0,56	0,32	0,58	0,15	0,197	0,45	0,11
Normalized index on the factor “Labour market”	0,199	0,76	0,87	0,48	0,72	0,86	0,12	0,40	0,65	0,54	0,47	0,43	0,49	0,71
Normalized index on the factor “Domestic market features”	0,63	0,04	0,24	0,88	0,28	0,13	0,65	0,199	0,63	0,46	0,26	0,75	0,28	0,27
Normalized index on the factor “Transport and Communications Infrastructure”	0,54	0,001	0,32	0,778	0,36	0,309	0,312	0,15	0,53	0,222	0,346	0,78	0,53	0,366
Overall index on “hard” factors	0,545	0,228	0,320	0,574	0,355	0,318	0,489	0,356	0,518	0,431	0,276	0,475	0,442	0,348

In contrast to the “soft” factors, a decomposition of “hard” factors showed that Volga federal district is full of long-term opportunities for investors. Almost every region has a good potential for growth. Figure 5 shows the ranking of regions on “hard” factors of the investment climate.

Figure 5. The overall index on “hard” factors of investment climate

.

As we can see from the chart, regions of Volga federal district have better conditions for “hard” factors of investment climate, rather than “soft” factors. Ultimately, “hard” factors determine the investment potential of a region, and “soft” factors determine the investment risk.

The average rank for Volga federal district on “hard” factors is 0,4. Seven regions out of 14 have ratings exceeding the average: Bashkortostan and Tatarstan Republics; Perm Territory; Nizhny Novgorod, Orenburg, Samara and Saratov Regions. These regions have huge potential for development in the coming years.

The “hard” factors analysis allows drawing the following conclusions:

1. The analysis shows that the overall rating on “hard” factors for Tatarstan Republic is lower than on “soft” factors. However, it is still the highest among Volga regions of Russia. The gap between the first and the second region reduced significantly, which suggests of the high investment potential of the second region - Bashkortostan Republic. Furthermore, the last region in the rating - Mari El Republic - gets slightly better results of overall rating (0,23 points against 0,15 points).

2. The Republic of Bashkortostan has the largest population in the district of more than four million people in 2013. There are six cities with a million-plus population within 500 kilometers of the regional administrative center - Ufa. Moreover, there is a large land area in this region, half of which is a farming land. Concerning economic activities, manufacturing and mining industries are well-developed, and the retail turnover is the highest among all Volga regions accounting almost 722 million rubles annually. All these characteristics show that this region can provide an advantageous combination of labor supply, manufacturing location and capabilities and trade turnover.

3. All regions of Volga federal district have good values on the factor “labor market”. Regions have comparatively low average income per capita, which is an advantage for investors. The unemployment rate in the district is less than 1,5%, and the labor participation rate exceeds 65% of the population. These rates suggest that Volga district is a good destination for investors in terms of labor supply.

4. At the same time, only five regions show good values of the factor “transport and communications infrastructure”: Tatarstan Republic, Samara Region, Bashkortostan Republic, Nizhny Novgorod Region and Saratov Region. Other regions, especially Mari El Republic, have a substandard infrastructure, which has a negative effect on their investment potential. Developing transport infrastructure is particularly significant for Orenburg region to enhance its performance on “hard” factors. This region has an advantageous geographical location near the border-crossing point with Kazakhstan, between two international transportation corridors and two cities with the population over one million people. Moreover, it has a large land area and high-performance manufacturing industry, including extractive sector. Accordingly, transport and communications infrastructure is one of the most important areas for improvement in this region.

5. A very promising rating has Perm Territory with the maximum value for the factor “environmental resources”, which investors appreciate the most from the “hard” factors (30%). However, in this region the unemployment rate is 1,5% of the population, which is the highest value among other Volga regions. With an effective labor policy, Perm region will rise to the fore by the level of its investment climate.

6. Unfortunately, six regions of Volga FD have not shown favorable results on the development of “hard” factors of the investment climate - Mordovia, Chuvashia and Udmurtia Republics; Kirov, Penza and Ulyanovsk Regions. These regions should put a greater emphasis on “soft” factors rather than “hard” factors, such as innovation development, building infrastructure sites, enhancing human capital and advancing living standards of the population. The good example of adopting a policy oriented on “soft” factors is Mordovia Republic. The great leap forward was made by this region towards the innovation-driven economy. In 2013 at least 24% of total production of goods, works and services in Mordovia were qualified as innovative goods. The funding allocation for the innovative industry for the last ten years increased for more than four times. Furthermore, while implementing innovation-focused policy regional administration reconsidered its legislation base, to which I devoted the following chapter.

Developing regional legislation

Most regions of Russia aim to give maximum assistance for investors in the form of various financial and non-financial measures that meet investor's interests and minimize risks related with investment projects. One of the main factors of high investment attractiveness of a region is an appropriate legislative framework that includes concrete preferences for different types of investors.

Nevertheless, foreign investor's expectations often do not coincide with the ongoing efforts of the regional authorities in Russia, which investment policies sometimes involve additional costs for a foreign investor while implementing a project, for example, a more complicated procedure of registration of real estate property rights.

To enhance the regional investment climate, most of the regions introduce various incentives that are intended to minimize investment risks. However, the unstructured regulatory framework is perceived by investors as a threat for conducting their businesses in Russia. Federal legislation norms in the field in investment are often contradicting one another. Consequently, regions are in a difficult position over their regulatory framework concerning investment climate.

Table 8 shows the analysis of the regional legislation framework of all 14 regions of Volga federal district of Russia, as well as the presence of specialized organizations dealing with investors in the region.

Table 8. Regional investment legislation analysis.
	Bashkortostan Republic	Mari El Republic	Mordovia Republic	Tatarstan Republic	Udmurtia Republic	Chuvashia Republic	Perm Territory	Kirov Region	Nizhny Novgorod Region	Orenburg Region	Penza Region	Samara Region	Saratov Region	Ulyanovsk Region
Investment Declaration	-	2013	2013	2012	-	-	2012	2013	2013	-	-	2013	-	2013
Foreign Investment Activity Act	1991	-	-	1994	-	2014	1997	-	-	1996	-	-	-	-
Capital Investment Activity Act	2010	2012	-	1998	-	-	-	2010	-	2009	-	-	-	2005
Public-Private-Partnership Act	2011	2011	-	2011	2009	2010	-	2010	2010	2012	2009	2010	2010	2008
Priority Investment Projects Act	2011	-	-	2013	-	-	-	2011	2006	2012	2010	2014	-	2008
Investment Development Strategy	2014	2013	-	2012	-	2013	-	2014	2013	2014	2014	-	2013	2008
Socio-Economic Development Strategy	2009	2007	2008	-	2009	2007	2011	2008	2006	2010	2007	2006	2011	2008
Investment Development Program	-	2010	2012	2011	2009	2011	-	2012	2014	-	2008	2013	2011	2012
Investment Tax Credit Act	2011	-	-	2011	-	-	-	2007	-	2012	-	2005	-	-
Corporate Property Tax Act	2003	2011	2003	2008	2001	2001	-	2003	-	2003	2003	2003	2003	2003
Government Support Act	2011	2013	2006	1999	2006	2004	2003	2012	2004	2012	2004	2005	2013	2011
Investment Fund	+	+	-	+	+	+	-	-	-	+	-	+	+	-
Investment Committee	-	+	+	+	+	+	-	+	+	+	+	+	+	-
Corporation for Development	+	-	+	-	-	+	+	+	-	+	+	+	-	+
Public Council	+	+	-	-	-	-	-	+	+	+	-	+	-	+
Agency for Attracting Investments	+	+	-	-	-	-	-	+	+	-	-	+	+	-

As we can see from the table, there is still much room for improvement in almost all regions of Volga federal district. Based on the results of the performed analysis, I came to the following conclusions:

1) Regional socio-economic development strategies are developed in all regions of Volga federal district, excepting Tatarstan region, where the strategy is in operation at the moment. Concerning investment strategy, there are four regions that do not have it yet: Mordovia, Udmurtia, Perm and Samara regions. Additionally, Ulyanovsk region needs to renovate its investment strategy as it was made seven years ago.

2) The least developed in terms of legislation is Perm Territory. Concerning investments there are only two regulatory acts - Investment Declaration 2012- which only states region's intentions to attract investments, and Foreign Investment Activity Act 1997, which is not only obsolete by implication, but also does not describe real benefits for foreign investors. In terms of financial capabilities of regions for investors in Perm Region, there is one act called Government Support for Investment Projects Act 2004, which has measures to evaluate investment projects and state's guarantees. There is neither subsidy for certain investment projects or investment tax credits from the government, not to mention investment fund. In my opinion, the underdevelopment of regulatory base to the point of investment creates high uncertainty risks, which deters investors from this region.

3) The governments of 12 Volga regions (except Mordovia and Perm) have worked out political initiatives on application of PPP method in order to improve several public services, such as roads, railways, schools and other services.

4) There are 7 regions of Volga federal district that run a harmonized and well-defined investment policy with an appropriate legislation: Tatarstan Republic, Kirov Region, Bashkortostan Republic, Orenburg Region, Ulyanovsk Region, Mari El Republic and Samara Region.

5) Only five regions can provide an investment tax credit or tax debt rescheduling scheme for investors in their regions. However, financial assistance of all regions in one form or another represents preference schemes, for example, reduced corporate income tax rates for priority investment projects.



Conclusion

In recent years, many developing countries despite their efforts to liberalize the economy in the face of increasing globalization are up against difficulties in attracting foreign investors. According to UNCTAD, FDI flows are heavily concentrated in a few countries. This is usually due to the imperfection of the regulatory framework, the unfavorable business environment, and small investment opportunities. The investment policy is often ineffective against the backdrop of institutional constraints, poor infrastructure, high market barriers and the absence of political stability. What is less obvious is the lack of quality data and its inconsistency and unreliability in many developing countries and countries with economies in transition, including the Russian Federation. These difficulties prevent the formation of an effective strategy to attract FDI in these countries and regions and the formation of a favorable investment climate.

Despite this fact, the flow of FDI to developing countries has increased significantly in recent decades, especially in 2012. However, they are concentrated in only a few countries (China, Hong Kong, Brazil, British Virgin Islands and Singapore). Russia, as a country in transition, is among the ten largest investments host countries, with a total volume of FDI of 51 billion US dollars. In 2012, for the first time in history, the inflow of FDI to developing countries exceeded FDI inflows to developed countries comprising 52% of the global flow of FDI (World Investment Report, WIR, 2013).

Both foreign and domestic investors need a favorable investment climate that provides high opportunities and low risks for a minimal investment. In most cases, the investments to the Russian Federation are concentrated in the primary sector of the economy- materials sector. Investors are guided by a large domestic market, rich natural resources and a relatively low production costs in export industries. However, the business environment is also important, as well as other factors, such as political and economic risks.

The task of improving regional investment climate has been identified as one of the main priorities of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development back in 2010. For more than four years, there have been significant changes for the better, including:

· Simplification of administrative procedures in the field of construction

· Reducing the cost of connecting to the electricity and municipal infrastructure

· Improvement of legislation in the field of customs, criminal and immigration controls

· Engaging regional authorities in the investment process and so on.

All this has allowed the country to attract 26,1 billion US dollars of foreign direct investments in 2013, which amounts for almost 40% increase compared to 2012. According to a survey of Bank of America Merrill Lynch in March 2013, Russia is the most attractive country for investors among the global emerging markets, surpassing Indonesia, Thailand, India, Turkey and China. However, investors still should choose the region to invest, and here some regions lag behind.

The results of the above analysis give a fundamental point for future recommendations for regions in the field of improving their investment climate. While applying this analysis to a specific region, regional authorities could identify their weak spots, and it will definitely help them to improve their investment climate, because they would know where to put an effort and evolve.

For investors, this analysis could be the determining factor in the decision of investing in a specific region. All these factors have different importance for investors because all of them have different objectives and operate in different economic sectors. For example, if the business in closely connected with people, factors “labor force” and “human capital” are of the first importance for the investor. In the same manner, machinery manufacturing investors would appreciate the available infrastructure the most. By simple changing the weights of each factor, we can adapt this methodology to any type of investor.

Regions with low manufacturing capabilities can allow investors to count on the support of regional authorities with financial issues. In this case, the region should develop a variety of tools to support financial investors. For example, to provide credit guarantees issued under the guarantee of the plot. This will attract not only large but also medium-size foreign companies.

Additionally, it bears mentioning that sometimes a very effective investment policy is carried out in the region and it becomes an attractive destination for investing, however, investors simply do not know about it even if they have their will to invest. Therefore, it is necessary to pursue an active marketing policy for each region to inform the world about benefits and opportunities they have. To ensure that the information reaches the investors directly, regions should participate in international investment forums, and present their regions from the best sides.



References

Auty. (1993). Sustaining Development in Mineral Economies: The Resource Curse Thesis. L.: Routledge.

Azeìmar, C., & Desbordes, R. (July 01, 2010). Short-run Strategies for Attracting Foreign Direct Investment. The World Economy, 33, 7, 928-957.

Detail Communications (2015). Investor Survey: Russia Outlook 2015: http://detailcomms.com/investor-survey-sentiment-russia-economic-outlook-stock-market-2015/

Easterly, W., & Rebelo, S. (January 01, 1993). Fiscal policy and economic growth: An empirical investigation. Journal of Monetary Economics, 32, 3, 417.

Folom'ev, A., & Revazov, V. (2000). The Investment Climate of Russian Regions and Ways to Improve It. Problems of Economic Transition, 43(3), 41-55.

International Labor Organization (ILO). Global Wage Report 2008/2009. Minimum Wages and Collective Bargaining: Towards Policy Coherence. www.ilo.org/

International Labor Organization (ILO). Global Wage Report 2012/2013. Wages and Equitable Growth. www.ilo.org/

Khan, M. H. (2005). What is a “Good Investment Climate”? Investment climate, growth, and poverty. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2005/09/6430927/investment-climate-growth-poverty , p. 77.

Kikeri, S., Kenyon, T., Palmade, V., International Finance Corporation., & World Bank. (2006). Reforming the investment climate: Lessons for practitioners. Washington, D.C: International Finance Corp.

Moore, M. & H. Schmitz (2008) Idealism, realism and the investment climate in developing countries. Working paper series, 307. Brighton: IDS.

Popkov V.P., & Semenov V.P. (2001). Organisation and financing investments. St. Petersburg, 224.

Russian Federal State Statistics Service (2013). Annual Report on Regional Socio-Economic Indicators for the Years 2013-2014. www.gks.ru/

UNCTAD, G. (2006). World investment report. Retrieved from: http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DIAE/World%20Investment%20Report/World_Investment_Report.aspx

World Bank (1994). Governance: the World Bank's experience. World Bank. Oxford University Press, Incorporated.

World Bank (2005). World Development Report 2005: A Better Investment Climate for Everyone. Banco Mundial e Oxford University Press: Nova Iorque e Oxford.

World Bank. (2006). World Development Report 2006: Equity and Development. Oxford University Press, Incorporated.



Annexes

Maps of Volga Federal District of the Russian Federation



Expert RA rating performance in Volga FD regions

Region	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	Direction
Tatarstan Republic	2B	2B	2B	1A	1A	2A	^v
Bashkortostan Republic	2B	2B	2B	2B	2B	2A	^
Perm Territory	2B	2B	2B	2B	2B	2B	___
Nizhny Novgorod region	2B	2B	2B	2B	2B	2B	___
Samara region	2B	2B	2B	2B	2B	2B	___
Saratov region	3B1	2B	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	^v
Udmurtia Republic	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	___
Chuvashia Republic	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	___
Orenburg region	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	___
Penza region	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	___
Ulyanovsk region	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	___
Mari El Republic	3B2	3B2	3C2	3B2	3B2	3B2	v^
Mordovia Republic	3B2	3B2	3B2	3B2	3B2	3B2	___
Kirov region	3B1	3C2	3B1	3B1	3B1	3B1	v^

Description:

1A - maximal potential, minimal risk

2A - medium potential, minimal risk

3A1 - low potential, minimal risk

3A2 - minor potential, minimal risk

1B - high potential, medium risk

2B - medium potential, medium risk

3B1 - low potential, medium risk

3B2 - minor potential, medium risk

1C - high potential, high risk

2C - medium potential, high risk

3C1 - low potential, high risk

3C2 - minor potential, high risk

3D - minor potential, extreme risk

Investment regulatory framework

Bashkortostan Republic

Core investment legislation

Capital Investment Activity Act 2010 (The Law of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 24.12.2010 #339-z).

Foreign Investment Activity Act 1991 (The Law of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 20.06.1991 #ÂÑ-6/35).

Investment Development Strategy Act 2014 (until 2020) (Government Resolution of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 18.04.2014 #188).

Priority Investment Projects Act 2011 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated August 19, 2011 #292). Related Acts from 2012.

Public-Private-Partnerships Act 2011 (The Law of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 30.05.2011 #398-z).

Socio-Economic Development Strategy Act 2009 (until 2020) (Government Resolution of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 30 September, 2009 #370).

Financial benefits and government support

Corporate Property Tax Act 2003 (The Law of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 28.11.2003 #43-z). Amendments to the Act from 2011 #455-z.

Investment Tax Credit Act 2011 (The Law of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 28.04.2011 #385-z).

Reduced Tax Rates for Capital Investments Act 2011 (The Law of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 31.10.2011 #454-z).

Organizations

Agency for Attracting Investments (Government Resolution of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 20 August, 2013 #1036-r).

Corporation for Development (Presidential Decree of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 20 December, 2010 #UP-730).

Investment Fund Act 2011 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated December 23, 2011 #502).

Public Council for Investment Climate (Presidential Decree of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 19 January, 2012 #UP-4).

Source: www.investrb.com/

Mari El Republic

Core investment legislation

Capital Investment Activity Act 2012 (The Law of the Republic of Mari El dated 21 March, 2012 #17-z).

Investment Activity Development Target Program for 2010-2014 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated April 28, 2010 #110).

Investment Declaration Act 2013 (Decree of the Republican Head dated 28 February, 2013 #24).

Investment Strategy Act 2013 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated October 10, 2013 #313).

Long-Term Socio-Economic Development Strategy 2007 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated August 31, 2007 #214).

Public-Private-Partnerships Act 2011 (The Law of the Republic of Mari El dated 2 August, 2011 #398-z).

Financial benefits and government support

Grants from the Head of the Republic of Mari El for Investment Projects (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated May 18, 2012 #164).

Subsidies Provision Act 2013 (Order of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the Republic of Mari El dated December 12, 2013 #15-n).

Tax Rates and Charges Act (The Law of the Republic of Mari El dated October 27, 2011 #59-Z).

Organizations

Agency for Investment Development (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated 20 January, 2014 #3)

Interdepartmental Committee on Investments and Economy Restructuring (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated March 26, 2001 #87).

Investment Committee (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated March 20, 2013 #72).

Investment Fund (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated 31 July, 2012 #285).

Public Council for Tariff Regulation (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mari El dated October 9, 2013 #311).

Source: www.mari-el.gov.ru/invest/en/Pages/main.aspx/

Mordovia Republic

Core investment legislation

Investment Attractiveness Program 2011 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mordovia dated June 27, 2011 #213).

Investment Declaration Act 2013 (Decree of the Head of the Republic of Mordovia dated July 26, 2013 #155-UG).

Investment Strategy Act

Socio-Economic Development Strategy 2008 (till 2025) (The Law of the Republic of Mordovia dated October 1, 2008 #94-Z).

Target Development Program 2012 (for 2013-2018) (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mordovia dated October 8, 2012 #363).

Financial benefits and government support

Corporate Property Tax Act 2003 (The Law of the Republic of Mordovia dated November 27, 2003 #54-Z).

Government Support on Investment Activity Act 2006 (The Law of the Republic of Mordovia dated February 20, 2006 #6-Z).

Reduced Tax Rates on Corporate Income Tax Act 2004 (The Law of the Republic of Mordovia dated November 25, 2004 #77-Z).

Subsidies Provision Act 2013 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mordovia dated March 18, 2013 #89).

Organizations

Corporation for Development

Interdepartmental Committee on Investments (Government Resolution of the Republic of Mordovia dated March 14, 2011 #78).

Investment Committee (Decree of the Head of the Republic of Mordovia dated July 26, 2013 #156-UG).

Source: www.investrm.ru/

Tatarstan Republic

Core investment legislation

Foreign Investment Activity Act 1994 (The Law of the Republic of Tatarstan dated July 19, 1994 #2180-XII).

Investment Activity Act 1998 (The Law of the Republic of Tatarstan dated November 25, 1998 #1872).

Investment Declaration Act 2012 (Presidential Decree of the Republic of Tatarstan dated June 18, 2012 #UP-477).

Investment Memorandum Act 2010 (for 2011) (Cabinet Council Resolution of the Republic of Tatarstan dated December 31, 2010 #1182).

Investment Strategy 2012 (no act).

Priority Investment Projects Act 2013 (Cabinet Council Resolution of the Resublic of Tatarstan dated November 25, 2013 #925).

Public-Private-Partnerships Act 2011 (The Law of the Republic of Tatarstan dated August 1, 2011 #50-ZRT).

Socio-Economic Development Program 2011 (for 2011-2015) (The Law of the Republic of Tatarstan dated April 22, 2011 #13-ZRT).

Financial benefits and government support

Corporate Income Tax Rates Act 2008 (The Law of the Republic of Tatarstan dated August 2, 2008 #53-ZRT).

Corporate Property Tax Rates Act (The Law of the Republic of Tatarstan dated November 28, 2003 #49-ZRT).

Grants for Investment Projects Act 1999 (Cabinet Council Resolution of the Republic of Tatarstan dated May 07, 1999 #284).

Investment Tax Credit Act 2011 (The Law of the Republic of Tatarstan dated October 10, 2011 #68-ZRT).

Organizations

Advisory Board on Foreign Investment (Cabinet Council Resolution of the Republic of Tatarstan dated January 14, 2005 #2).

Investment Committee (Presidential Decree of the Republic of Tatarstan dated July 5, 2012 #UP-538).

Venture Capital Fund (Cabinet Council Resolution of the Republic of Tatarstan dated November 17, 2004 #498).

Source: www.mert.tatarstan.ru/ and www.invest.tatar.ru/

Udmurtia Republic

Core investment legislation

Investment representative in Udmurt Republic (Presidential Decree dated April 10, 2012 #68)

Public-Private-Partnerships Act 2009 (The Law of the Republic of Udmurtia dated October 9, 2009 #39-RZ).

Republican Target Program on Attracting Investments for 2010-2014 (Government Resolution of the Republic of Udmurtia dated September 7, 2009 #247).

Socio-Economic Development Strategy 2009 (till 2025) (The Law of the Republic of Udmurtia dated October 9, 2009 #40-RZ).

Financial benefits and government support

Corporate Property Tax Act 2003 (The Law of the Republic of Udmurtia dated November 27, 2003 #55-RZ).

Government Support on Investment Activity Act 2006 (The Law of the Republic of Udmurtia dated June 22, 2006 #26-RZ).

Reduced Tax Rates on Investment Activities Act 2003 (The...