The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Economic transformations of 1985-1991.


Work is presented by department of history of Russia of the Yaroslavl state university of P.G. Demidov. The research supervisor - the doctor of historical sciences, professor V.T. Aniskov

Article contains the main scientific results of the dissertation research devoted to an industrial perspective of history of system social and economic transformations 1985 — 1991 in a regional context of the Yaroslavl region.

The article contains the main scientific results of the thesis research devoted to the industrial perspective in the history of system-defined social and economic transformations in the Yaroslavl region in 1985-1991.

In recent years in Russia and abroad the considerable number of the researches "reorganizations" collected. Nevertheless today's historiography devoted to specifically economic problems of that time actually is in a formation stage. Therefore we conducted the research on a subject which main theses are given below.

So, in the 1970-1980th the big ("Stalin") macrocycle of the Soviet history came to an end. To that a prerequisite the increasing discrepancy of former, rather narrow mobilization forms all to the becoming complicated content of the Soviet living arrangement was objective. Awareness of instability of the historical moment led to disengagement of elite of the country on neutral and conformist, orthodox and guarding, canned food -

tivno-reformist and radical reformist groups.

The beginning of economic "reorganization" (1985 - 1986) was marked by the choice for rather active, technocratic course connected with the advancing development of basic mechanical engineering. This course corresponded to installations of conservative statesmen and was defined by the breakthrough purpose in technological modernization of economy. But, unfortunately, already at a planning stage a number of miscalculations which in the next years seriously slowed down realization of conceived was allowed here. For "the political weight" of conservatives it had fatal consequences.

Nevertheless evolutionary development of economy of the USSR in the years of "acceleration" (1985-1987) continued without sushchestven-

Economic transformations 1985-1991 1T.

the iy crisis moments, and a pas the regional level it was shown enough clearly. In particular, social and economic development of the Yaroslavl region quite reflected a picture over the country in general though it had also features. Let's tell, advance on the way of a technical intensification in the Yaroslavl region was carried out rather more slowly, than across all USSR, but in general situation with the scientific and technical progress (STP) in the Yaroslavl economy was rather favorable.

At the same time in 1985-1987 in the country and the area the large-scale economic experiments directed to expansion of the rights of the enterprises continued. Strengthening at the level of separate economic entities of action of so-called feedback within which a powerful impulse gained development of self-supporting crews, the collective contract and the direct contractual relations between suppliers and consumers became the main installation. There was even a concept of "full self-financing", i.e. works of the enterprise in the conditions of rigid financial responsibility and self-financing, but at more liberal standards of distribution of own share of profit which size besides significantly increased. As a result along with positive results, such as some increase in discipline of contractual deliveries, economy of prime cost, etc., economic experiments generated also disturbing trends, in particular the outlined growth funds of consumption to the detriment of funds of accumulation.

At the second stage of social and economic "reorganization" (1988-1989) the situation qualitatively changed. The "Perestroika" management under the influence of the radical wing, in fact, refused mainly technocratic line of development and addressed transformation of the most economic mechanism. Specific regulations radical hozyay-

stvenny reform were recorded on a June plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU 1987 1. and in the acts adopted following the results, first of all - the Law on state enterprise.

The first results of shift clearly testified to a number of unsuccessful trends (any price increase, growth of poor money supply, the begun dissonance of a system of material security, etc.) which in any given a Mercedes affected all economy. At the same time the general statistical dynamics of 1988 remained favorable that induced the power to draw incorrect conclusions: installations for 1989 provided acceleration of dismantling of a planned system and replacement se "a new economic mechanism" in the directions of development of "full self-financing and self-financing", transition to free wholesale trade in resources, etc. As a result economic development in 1989 though continued, but its indicators appeared lower than the level of the most "stagnant" years. The negative factors which were outlined in 1988 considerably amplified now.

Withdrawal on the second plan of scientific and technical progress became obvious minus of economic reform also. Already then, as sets an example to the Yaroslavl region, such negative processes as accumulation of "dead" non-cash funds on accounts of the enterprises, dispersion of means on a set of industrial facilities under construction, reduction of the centralized capital investments and state orders, decrease in a share of investments into increase in technological level of production, etc. began to be felt. Then it was torpedoed the Persian-pektiviyeyshy process of creation of the Soviet concerns and deeply wrong idea of full self-financing of science received "start in life" that turned back loss of scientific shots.

The most important structural element of radical economic reform was the reorganization of institutes of management of economy which was taking place under a banner

decentralization. Respectively, in 1988 1989 1T. fast weakening of influence of the central economic bodies, industry ministries, and the most important - partorgan of all levels with the corresponding increase of imperious and economic "weight" of directors and labor collectives of public industries and also local Soviet authorities was observed. Redistribution of powers happened without adaptation of results of changes to real life that also also made a considerable contribution to disbalance of economy. However, some success in "social reorientation" of economy was achieved: growth rates of release of consumer goods and social construction accelerated. But psychologically these achievements depreciated the general negative processes of those years - avalanche increase of poor cash, unknown speculation, etc.

Thus, the first two years of a "Perestroika" economic reform when it was carried out still z rather "sterile" socio-political conditions, unambiguously revealed its negative balance. Radical figures in the top management of the country intended to introduce market economy of the western type in the USSR. And as the Soviet economic system all the same was subject to elimination, tactics of careful experimenting was rejected.

On the third, finishing (1990-! 991) the stage "reorganizations" all destructive factors considerably increased the influence. At the same time an opportunity to stabilize a situation measures of planned economy was blocked by radical forces which formed the new, "Russian" center of the power. In the tire of economic improvement this circumstance became the main problem. Development of economy began to be defined spontaneously, at the level of the separate enterprises and regions that, on the one hand, in the conditions of crisis

promoted the solution of many problems, but with another entailed also egoistical measures. Therefore the uniform economic organism of the country gave almost at once a serious crack, having led thereby to a proshrysh practically of all regions.

The period of 1990-1991 was characterized also by intrasystem evolution of the regional power. Its main feature • - castling of the statuses of regional committee of the CPSU and regional executive committee in favor of the second that in 1990 led to alienation between the party and Soviet power of the Yaroslavl region and to sharp decrease in effective management of economy in its territory. Therefore in 1991 the party, Soviet and economic elite of the region rallies on the basis of the idea of economic stabilization again, and some time such cooperation really allowed to smooth crisis processes several. But on July 20, 1991 under the influence of the decree of the Russian President revived was a regional triumvirate of the power broke up finally.

In the long term as extremely adverse further decrease in attention to NTP problems appeared. Financial difficulties of 1990-1991 led to the general sharp dumping of capital investments and, besides, generated threat of mass dismissal of production personnel with serious social consequences. Such option then was prevented by vigorous actions of directors of the enterprises and governing bodies of regions, but the general situation on places remained hard.

At the same time in the country and specifically in the Yaroslavl region the process of "rynkonization" amplified. Practically on all its main innovations (privatization, etc.) pinned great expectations on recovery from the crisis. And practically in all cases these hopes were replaced by alarm. New market structures, without solving the collected problems in any way, generated a lot of new, than heated even more

social atmosphere. On these questions the warning letters were sent to Moscow, but there practically did not react to them: there was a "big" game of politics.

Collecting as a snowball economic difficulties as a result of steel not the last factor which caused pobe-

du in political struggle of new Russian government and apologists of radical market transformations. At the same time dismantling of the Soviet economic mechanism and the forced growth of new market structures in many respects "cleared away the place" for subsequent "shock therapy" and technically.

Alexis Melinda
Other scientific works: