Subject. The impact of digital platforms on the spatial polarization of the Russian economy and the conditions under which they can weaken rather than strengthen interregional imbalances. Objectives. To conceptualize the supra-regional digital cluster as an independent object of regional policy and to show that the resulting impact of platform-cluster integration on territorial inequality is determined by the institutional configuration of the platform, and not by the properties of digital technologies as such. Methods. The method of theoretical synthesis is applied: the provisions of the concept of platform capitalism by N. Srnicek are compared with the model of cumulative causality and endogenous agglomeration, dating back to the works of G. Myrdal and P. Krugman. Additionally, a stylized bi-regional model of value added distribution was built, illustrating two multidirectional scenarios of platform integration. Results. A definition of a supra-regional digital cluster is proposed, distinguishing it from the classical geographically localized (Porter) model and from technological platforms as such. The thesis on the institutional ambivalence of platforms is formulated: the same technology reproduces and enhances agglomeration rents in metropolitan hubs with a centrally distributed design, and ensures network alignment with a federally distributed one. Four mechanisms of transferring the smoothing effect to the territory are revealed: production and cooperative, personnel and labor, technical and standardization, and infrastructural. The stylized example shows that the transition from the first design to the second is able to reduce the inter-regional gap in terms of specific effect by 18-24 percentage points, all other things being equal. Conclusions. The digital platform is not an automatic tool for regional alignment. The smoothing effect is achieved only if three institutional conditions are met: the presence of a distributed node architecture, formalized equality of regional participants in decision-making on platform development, and built-in rules for redistributing the added value created. Without these conditions, platform integration turns into a technologically mediated channel for extracting rent by the center from the periphery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
BUSHUEVA et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: