Analysis reveals significant barriers to entrepreneurship in Russia, indicating the need for targeted financial and infrastructure improvements.
The imbalance in the economic development of the regions creates significant obstacles to the conduct and development of entrepreneurial activity: the gap in transport, digital, and financial infrastructure between large industrial centers and remote depressed regions, the difference in the availability of financing, as credit institutions give priority to economically active regions, staffing shortages, and administrative barriers that create unstable conditions for business development, the low purchasing power of the population in less developed regions. Practical recommendations aimed at stimulating the growth and development of entrepreneurship in Russia have been developed. The uneven creation of the number of entrepreneurial companies in the federal districts of the country has been revealed. It is noted that progress is mainly observed in small forms of entrepreneurship in all federal districts of the country, however, the dynamics of their revenue does not always demonstrate a steady positive trend. Institutional differences related to socio-cultural norms, including rules for doing business and interacting with clients, as well as the level of education, technological development, availability of qualified personnel and the specifics of using financial instruments have a significant impact on the activities of entrepreneurs. The above factors form differences in the resilience of businesses to risky events in different regions of the country. An analysis of the average number of employees of entrepreneurial companies was carried out, which made it possible to identify the key difficulties characteristic of each federal district. Based on the data obtained, practical recommendations are formulated aimed at eliminating the identified problems and creating favorable conditions for the development of entrepreneurship in various regions of Russia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chernukhina et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: