Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article is devoted to the study of the evolution of approaches to state planning in the Russian energy sector. In recent decades, the energy sector has faced unprecedented challenges: geopolitical instability, accelerating the energy transition, and the imperative to achieve technological sovereignty are fundamentally changing the requirements for management systems. The author examines the theoretical foundations of indicative planning laid by R. Frisch and Ya. Tinbergen explores successful foreign practices (France, Japan, and Denmark) and also shows how approaches to managing the domestic fuel and energy sector have changed over the century-from the GOELRO directive plan to the modern contract-decentralized model. At the same time, the author identifies the main disadvantages of the current mechanism: its static nature, fragmentation, departmental closeness, and dependence on corporate plans of large businesses, which is especially evident in the analysis of the Energy Strategy of the Russian Federation until 2050. The purpose of this article is to substantiate the need for the formation of an adaptive indicative planning mechanism in the Russian energy sector. Based on the conducted research, it can be concluded that the extensive development model and static planning have exhausted their potential. Modern challenges require a transition to a dynamic system involving continuous monitoring based on digital platforms and quantum computing, as well as a new type of industry contract focused on long-term R&D. The novelty of the research lies in an attempt to consider the evolution of planning in the Russian fuel and energy complex through the prism of the transition from a static contract model to an adaptive indicative system. Thus, this work is aimed at a comprehensive study of the potential of adaptive planning, which allows us to identify ways to improve the management of the industry in order to achieve national strategic priorities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andrey Agashin (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: