Entrepreneurial city in Russian economy: quantitative and qualitative parameters of identification

This paper is devoted to research the “entrepreneurial city” in Russian economy. Firstly the authors analyze the development of the concept in foreign studies and compare the results with Russian authors researches. This concept is not so widespread both in scientific sphere and in municipal level in Russia. Then the authors propose two groups of parameters that give the opportunity to identify entrepreneurial city using Russian statistics. From the one hand there are quantitative parameters that include the degree of economic diversity and services; presence of human capital; the degree of the urban environment and living conditions. Each of criteria was evaluated on the several statistic indicators. From the other hand there are qualitative parameters that help to explain differences between similar cities. For example, the authors consider two close Ural cities, Chelyabinsk and Yekaterinburg, and analyze its differences according quantitative and qualitative criteria of entrepreneurial city.


Introduction
In recent years there has been a sharp increase of interest in spatial development both in the country's management sphere and among economists. The creation of the spatial development strategy for Russia until 2025, the preparation of "Smart cities" pilot project, the project of agglomeration creation, the numerous urban forums are all part of a big Russian task to find new trajectories for regional growth and development.
Using of entrepreneurial city concept in modern conditions can open new ways of development. At the first managerial tools within this concept has produced good results in different countries of the world and at the second any city can become an entrepreneurial, despite of the size and initial amount of resources. The latter is especially important for Russia, with its huge number of small cities and a huge gap in their ability to manoeuvre, compared to the capital cities.
We see the aim of our work as an attempt to find "entrepreneurial city" in Russia. For this purpose we consider the differences in concept in foreign and Russian economic studies, define the quantitative criteria of its identification and to consider the influence of qualitative parameters in relation to Chelyabinsk and Yekaterinburg.

The emergence and development of the entrepreneurial city concept (materials and methods)
The beginning of an active study of the "entrepreneurial cities" was initiated by D. Harvey in 1989. [1] He analyzed the changes that had taken place in the activities of city governments and noted that in conditions of significant political and economic instability, local authorities had been looking for new ways to stimulate the development of territories and increase employment. This entrepreneurial focus differed from the previously prevailing style of urban governance, which was mainly aimed at providing local social services to the population. The author also paid attention to the increasing competition between cities and, as a result, the change in the managerial model of local government: from managerialism to an active entrepreneurial position.
In foreign tradition the entrepreneurial city is characterized by the presence of the implemented innovation strategy and functional institutional structure, the main task of which is to create conditions for maximum attraction of mobile financial, production and consumer flows. [2] As the main characteristics of the entrepreneurial city, foreign authors emphasize the large-scale projects on the basis of public-private partnership to promote the territory, the risks of such projects can be covered with the use of public resources and the effect of their implementation can affect an area larger than the city. [1] Therefore, calling cities as entrepreneurial, the authors do not mean the ability of the urban community to "do business", they mean the ability of local authorities to act, "take" new steps to improve the internal institutional environment that contributes to long-term sustainable growth and development of the city's economy (see, for example, [3]). Entrepreneurial cities work purposefully on their image in order to become attractive for business [4] and for highly qualified specialists -"creative class" [5].

Main characteristics of entrepreneurial city Author
Public-private projects Risk distribution between government and business in such projects The effectiveness of the projects extend to the territory more than this city In the studies of Russian scientists the "entrepreneurial city" concept is actively used, but, as a rule, without specifying the content. [6] In addition, there are no clear criteria for determining which city is an entrepreneurial. In Russia, the main source of entrepreneurial practices distribution is the local government, interested in the development of the territory, which has the trust of business and the population. A number of institutional barriers [7] prevent the spread of the "entrepreneurial city" concept in practice. However, the management staff of the most active cities are trying to realize the entrepreneurial practices, despite the limitations and exceptional heterogeneity of the Russian economic space. [8] 3 Quantitative parameters of entrepreneurial city identification in Russia (results and discussion) First, let's clarify the principles of sample for Russian cities research. The Federal State Statistics Service publishes information about Russian cities every two years in special edition "Regions of Russia. The main social and economic indicators of cities". This sample includes all cities that have the regional capital status and also cities that are not the administrative center of their region, but have a population of more than 100 thousand inhabitants.
According to numerous researchers, active cities compete with each other for attracting investment and population (see, for example, [9]), so we will search entrepreneurial cities among the cities that work most effectively in both directions. For clarity, we present results graphically ( fig. 1). According to the objectives of the study we are interested in 28 cities located in the first quadrant, bordered by dotted lines: Astrakhan, Vladivostok, Volgograd, Voronezh, Yekaterinburg, Kazan, Kaluga, Krasnodar, Krasnoyarsk, Moscow, Nizhnevartovsk, Nizhnekamsk, Nizhny Novgorod, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Perm, Rostov-on-don, Samara, St. Petersburg, Saratov, Sochi, Surgut, Tomsk, Tyumen, Ufa, Khabarovsk, Chelyabinsk, Yakutsk.
In our first work [10] we used the following parameters to identify among them the cities with the greatest entrepreneurial potential: 1) the degree of economic diversity and services; 2) the presence of human capital; 3) the degree of the urban environment and living conditions. Due to the limitations of statistical accounting in Russia, several indicators will evaluate each of them: − the increase in the number of enterprises and organizations above the national average, the growth of retail trade turnover per capita above the national average (rubles), the growth of catering turnover per capita above the national average (rubles) (to understand the level of economic diversity and services); − the average number of doctors per 10 000 population higher than the national average (to understand availability of human capital); − the average total area of residential premises per 1 inhabitant of the city above the national average, the increase in the number of registered crimes per 1000 people is below the national average (to understand the quality of the urban environment and living conditions). Because of the quantitative analysis, 6 Russian cities from the first quadrant were identified as entrepreneurial, the activities of their leadership are most consistent with the entrepreneurial city concept: Samara, Yekaterinburg, Kazan, Krasnodar, St. Petersburg and Tyumen. They are characterized by a positive migration growth of the population and an increase in private investment in fixed assets above the average Russian level, as well as a developed service sector, the availability of human capital and good living conditions for people. Now let us consider in more detail the situation in the cities of the Ural Federal District, especially Yekaterinburg and Chelyabinsk ( fig. 2). We chose these cities because of their similarity: the same district, the same administrative status, the close number of population (more than a bln), a lot of manufactures in economic structure. Moreover these two cities will be include into deep agglomeration process according to national economic recovery plan.

Conclusion
In the conditions of global instability and reduction of revenues from the federal and regional budgets, Russian cities need to find independent ways out of the crisis. One of these ways can be the development of entrepreneurial skills of municipal officials and the introduction of successful practices of entrepreneurial city. The applied orientation of this concept and practical significance for the design of development strategies, including problem cities, makes it important to understand the criteria for their recognition.
The authors of the study tried to consider the situation in Russia, we identified 6 cities as entrepreneurial using quantitative parameters and then tried to explain the differences of very close cities Chelyabinsk and Yekaterinburg, taking into account quantitative and qualitative criteria of entrepreneurial city identification. According to entrepreneurial city concept municipal officials of Chelyabinsk should be more attentive to realization of city innovation strategy and to keep it despite of the city management changes. And also they should develop and encourage the initiative urban community.