## The Russian State’s Size and its Footprint: Have They Increased?

_IMF Working Papers, March 8, 2019_

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [The Russian State’s Size and its Footprint: Have They Increased?](https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2019/03/09/the-russian-states-size-and-its-footprint-have-they-increased-46662)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/en/publications/wp/issues/2019/03/09/the-russian-states-size-and-its-footprint-have-they-increased-46662/index.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/en/publications/wp/issues/2019/03/09/the-russian-states-size-and-its-footprint-have-they-increased-46662/index.json)
- [Bundle manifest](/en/publications/wp/issues/2019/03/09/the-russian-states-size-and-its-footprint-have-they-increased-46662/bundle-manifest.json)

## Bibliographic details
- Authors: Gabriel Di Bella, Oksana Dynnikova, Slavi T Slavov
- Published: March 8, 2019
- Series: IMF Working Papers
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.5089/9781498302791.001

---

### Summary findings
- Short answer: The size of the Russian State has not increased much in the last few years, but its economic footprint remains significant.
- The state's size increased from about 32 percent of GDP in 2012 to 33 percent in 2016.
- The 2012–2016 series is "not far from the EBRD's estimate of 35 percent for 2005-10."
- This evidence contrasts with a mainstream narrative that contends the state's size doubled in the last decade.

### State footprint in activity and employment
- State share in formal sector activity: close to 40 percent.
- State share in formal sector employment: about 50 percent.
- These measures indicate a deep state footprint despite limited change in overall state size as a share of GDP.

### Market structure, competition, and efficiency
- Sectors in which the state is present are more concentrated.
- Concentration is large even in sectors where the state's share is low.
- Implication: need to protect and promote competition, with particular emphasis on state procurement.

### State-owned enterprises (SOEs) performance
- SOEs' performance appears weaker than that of privately-owned firms.
- Weaker SOE performance may be subtracting from growth.

### Policy recommendations and implications
- Protect and promote competition across sectors, including where state presence is limited.
- Strengthen competition safeguards in state procurement to mitigate concentration effects.
- Address weaker SOE performance to reduce its potential drag on growth.

*Gabriel Di Bella, Oksana Dynnikova, and Slavi T Slavov. March 8, 2019. IMF Working Papers 2019, 053 (2019).*

---

## Content in this bundle

- **Working Paper**
  - [Working Paper (Markdown version)](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2019/wpiea2019053.pdf.md){rel="alternate" type="text/markdown"}
  - [Working Paper (PDF)](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2019/wpiea2019053.pdf){rel="external" type="application/pdf"}

---

_Source: https://www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2019/03/09/the-russian-states-size-and-its-footprint-have-they-increased-46662_