The article analyzes regional socio-economic inequality in the Russian Federation as a complex, multilevel and historically determined phenomenon that is reproduced under the influence of factors of the "first" (climatic, resource) and "second" nature (human capital, institutions, infrastructure). The key theoretical approaches to understanding spatial inequality are considered. Special attention is paid to the system of indicators of regional differentiation (GRP per capita, Gini coefficient, poverty line, real incomes of the population) and mechanisms of state equalization – redistributive, stimulating and institutional. Using the example of national projects of the Russian Federation, it is analyzed how the initial conditions of the regions (institutional environment, budgetary security, managerial potential) determine the effectiveness of federal instruments and can both reduce and consolidate interregional imbalances. The risks associated with a unified approach to regional development are assessed. Systematic, comparative, and structural-functional analysis were used; secondary analysis of Rosstat statistics and the results of national projects, as well as the case study method (Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District, Republic of Ingushetia). The novelty lies in substantiating the thesis that the effectiveness of national projects as an equalization mechanism is determined not so much by project procedures as by the institutional, financial and managerial characteristics of the regions. A contradiction has been revealed: unified federal instruments can enhance the competitive advantages of strong regions and not produce the expected effect in weak regions with poor quality of public administration. Based on the analysis, it is concluded that in order to reduce regional inequality, it is necessary to move from unification to differentiated strategies that take into account the real capabilities of the subjects of the Russian Federation. A provision has been formulated on the need to synchronize environmental, social and economic policies, as well as the introduction of flexible, targeted support mechanisms, including institutional diagnostics and performance monitoring. Otherwise, even large-scale financing risks mothballing rather than overcoming spatial polarization.
Dekhanova et al. (Fri,) studied this question.