Economic
sciences / 6. Marketing and management
Rudneva A.J., Cand.Econ.Sci. Baranova N.A.
A.
Baitursynov Kostanay state university, Kazakhstan
THE
ANALYSIS OF APPROACHES TO DEFINITION OF CONCEPT «MONOCITY»
Now the government of Kazakhstan emphasizes necessity
of steady development of the state which is possible in case of maintenance of
steady development of regional system which structural elements are cities, and
the special attention is deserved with monocity in which lives the big number
of the population of the country.
Analyzing researches of modern scientists in the field
of studying problems of monocities, it is necessary to note, that precise
definition of concept «monocity» now is not present.
So, analytical agency RWAY defines monoprofile city as
city in which cityforming enterprise defines practically all economic and, that
is especially important, the social processes occuring in city [1].
Experts of scientifically-educational fund «Expert
institute» in research «Monoprofile cities and cityforming the enterprises»
define as the term «monocity» the following: the monocity is a settlement, the
organizations or which inhabitants are unable to compensate by own strength the
risks of the external economic environment excluding an opportunity of steady
development of this settlement [2].
According to this approach monocity - settlement where
there is so close communication between functioning cityforming enterprises and
economic-social aspects of a life of the settlement, that market prospects of
the enterprise essentially influence destiny of this settlement as those.
The certain interest deserves opinion of researcher
Trusova K.E. which specifies a significant amount of the definitions concerning
monocities, and differentiates concepts «monocity», «monostructural», «monoprofile»,
«monoindustrial» and «monoindustrial», «monobranch», «monospecialized» city and
comes to conclusion that they do not allow to characterize in a complex the
investigated phenomenon while in the fullest measure specificity of city monosettlement
the term reflects «monofunctional city» as which the author understands «a
phenomenon of monosettlement as special type of economic structure of the
settlement, connected with limitation of its external functions» [3].
The important role at disclosing concept of monocity
is played with the analysis of approaches of foreign authors to definition of
essence monocities (table 1).
Table 1 - the Analysis of approaches to definition of «monocity»
|
The USA |
The Great Britain |
|
City-company |
City-factory
(city-mill) |
|
The place where even at the initial stage of development all the
organizations belong to one joint-stock company which provides employment and
creates an infrastructure of city (habitation, shops, transport etc.) |
Settlement which, as a rule, is developed around of one or several
factories (mills) |
|
Russia |
Kazakhstan |
|
Monocity |
|
|
City where a life and well-being of people are in close dependence
from activity one enterprise, or group of the enterprises connected by a
uniform industrial chain or serving same market on which it is borrowed more
a quarter of economically active population |
City where the basic part (20 % and more) industrial production and
able-bodied population is concentrated on one or several cityforming
enterprises, as a rule, raw orientation which thus define all the economic
and social processes occuring in city |
Analyzing foreign sources, it is
possible to note, that as monocity they do not use such term. Instead of it
allocate cities-factories and cities-companies. Despite of a difference in
approaches, similarity - the overwhelming control cityforming enterprises above
maintenance of employment is traced.
Proceeding from the above-stated, the monoprofile city
represents complex structure in which the city and the enterprise are
indissoluble. Cityforming enterprise realizes not only economic, but also
social functions, providing conditions of ability to live in settlement [4]. Hence,
in the term «the monoprofile city» key is concept of cityforming enterprises.
Though in the legislation of Republic Kazakhstan it is not given at present
precise definition to concept cityforming enterprises.
Thus, the analysis of publications on research of
monocities testifies that existing approaches to their definition are
inconsistent, differ with the basic classification attributes. It is possible
to sum up, that at reference of city to a category «monoprofile» it is not
necessary to be limited only to quantitative criteria. For rendering address
support of development of monocities it is necessary to define precisely
criteria of reference of city to the given category as the future of economy
depends on success of realization of programs of development of monoprofile
settlements.
Literature:
1 Ivashina N.S., Ulyakina N.A. Monoprofile of city:
theoretical aspects of definition of a category // Economy, Magnitogorsk, 2011.
- P. 31-34
2 Voronin I. How will be rescueed monocities? // Bulletin
the real estate, October, 2009. - P. 3-15
3 Trusova K.E. Management steady development of
monocity: the author's abstract of the dissertation on competition of a
scientific degree of Cand.Econ.Sci. - Krasnodar, 2013. - 27 p.
4 Kokh I.A. Tendenc of social development of
monoprofile cities with cityforming enterprise // Scientific bulletin of the
Ural academy of public service: political science, economy, sociology, the
right. - 4 (9). 2009. - P. 7-19