Methodology for determining the impact level of municipalities' fiscal capacity on AIC sustainability

. The purpose of the study is to develop a methodology for quantitative evaluation of the degree of correlation between sustainability (values of its indicators and components) of AIC development and budgetary security of municipal districts. The methodology is based on mathematical logic, represents a three-stage analysis, involves comparing the values of budget indicators (in the revenue side - two indicators; in the expenditure side - six indicators) with the values of indicators of four fundamental components of AIC sustainable development (economic (E), social (S), environmental (N), institutional (I) of municipal districts by calculating correlation coefficients, their transformation into an aggregate form, the formation of which is based on the synergy principle. The methodology is designed for researchers, whose interests are connected with solving problems of regulation of socio-economic development at the local level and the level of the subject of the Federation for making managerial decisions. The results of the analysis will serve as reliable information in substantiating the achieved level of development of the local territories of the region, forecasting the values of the components and the level of development of the AIC, based on the planned values of the indicators of budgetary provision.


Introduction
Studies devoted to the sustainable development of territories in the Russian Federation are quite popular [1][2][3][4][5]. There is a large number of municipalities (hereinafter referred to as MUs) with rural settlements prevailing in the structure of rural areas. The most important economic tool for forming, planning and spending the resources of a territory is its budget. Consequently, the revenue part of the budget has a certain influence on the level of sustainable development of the territory, on the sectors of the economy, in particular, in the sphere of AIC.
The internationally accepted definition of sustainable development reflects its main objective -meeting the needs and demands of the present generation without endangering the development opportunities of future generations [6]. FZ no. 131 (Federal Law of 06. 10.2003, "On General Principles of Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation") as means of regulating the local economy and levers of influence on it, determines the following tools: property owned by the municipality, property rights of the local government, and local budget funds.
The legally defined role of local self-government (hereinafter referred to as LSG) is to ensure the achievement of planned socially significant goals by influencing financial and economic processes in the sphere of formation, adoption and execution of the local budget [7]. This task is actualized and becomes a "strength test" of local government competence, its ability to meet its obligations in conditions of insufficient funding, which is characteristic of a large proportion of the MOE in Russia [8]. "Municipal governance" as an administrative component of the system -municipal policy of rural territories -is the activity of LSG to create a system to ensure the living conditions of the population and address other issues within the authority of the municipality [9]. The competence of LSG includes creating conditions for the sustainable development of local entrepreneurship (small businesses), providing jobs for the working-age population and increasing revenues to the local budget to create a financial basis for the implementation of social programs [10].
The assessment of budget sustainability, its indicators, and the quality of its implementation are presented in the works [11][12][13]. The indicators for indicative assessment of the financial and economic condition of a municipal district (hereinafter -MD) are: the rate of economic development; the level of financial support for education; the amount of subventions for the development of culture and physical education; the amount of subsidies aimed at compensating citizens for housing and utilities; the amounts and their share in the budget allocated for the organization of municipal administration; the amount of funds planned for the introduction of energy saving technologies and improving their efficiency [14].
Article 5 ("state agricultural policy") of Federal Law No. 264 defines the term "sustainable development of rural areas". It is based on the stable development of socioeconomic systems, expressed both in absolute indicators (volume of agricultural production, scale of land use) and relative ones (efficiency of agriculture, employment rate of economically active rural population, quality and standard of living of the population living in rural areas) [15].
The experience of building "harmonious" market mechanisms of "all-regulating" nature in the post-Soviet period allows us to state that market regulators alone cannot ensure sustainable development of agriculture. The need for state support of the industry, which has weak economic protection, should be perceived by the state and society as a form of fair compensation for its inevitable losses [16].
AIC enterprises, seeking to improve the efficiency of their activities, are forced to introduce market-appropriate management tools, which, if successful, create the basis for expanded and stable production, which can be characterized as a prerequisite for the transition to "sustainable AIC development" [17].
The implementation of innovations by AIC enterprises allows them to strengthen and maintain the achieved level of development, increasing the chances of viability in crisis conditions in the future [18][19][20][21][22]. The development of digital technologies provides an opportunity for more efficient management and implementation of activities in agriculture, despite the sad experience of the lack of demand for this industry in the past by potential owners of capital [23][24][25][26]. Innovation in AIC implies the flow of investment, which is a tool for financing economic growth. The formation of profit, the increase in its volume by economic entities of AIC allows the accumulation of funds for further capital investment [27]. According to RAS academician A.I. Altukhov. [28], the increase in the value of investment should prevail over the increase in agricultural production, because "investment is a factor that guarantees the possibility of expanded reproduction and growth of economic indicators of the industry". The assessment of the balance sheet liquidity of AIC enterprises determines the extent to which they cover their liabilities, which of course characterizes the level of sustainability of their activities and further prospects of functioning [29].
The strategic task of AIC is to ensure food security [30]. Considering the population growth at the global level with the simultaneous reduction of arable land area of the planet, the role of AIC in ensuring economic security will increase every year [31].
Sustainable development requires the material and technical base of agricultural production that significantly increases labour productivity, a comprehensive indicator of the productive capacity of an economic entity [32][33].  It should be remembered that the correlation coefficient is statistically significant if it is valid (determined by comparing the empirical value of the Student coefficient with its critical value). The autocorrelation factor -the close interrelation of budget indicators with each other -should also be taken into account. The obtained values of the pairwise correlation coefficients are transferred to Table 1. The second stage of the analysis involves transforming the previously determined pairwise correlation coefficients into transformed correlation coefficients ( * ) of AIC sustainability components:  The obtained values of the levels of influence of the budget indicators (fiscal capacity) on the sustainability of AIC development allow quantifying the degree of interrelation between the factors and the outcome variables -the components of the sustainability of AIC development. The eight relevant factors -budget indicators (two for the revenue side and six for the expenditure side) as a result of the analysis based on statistical data from the MD region -will determine the level of influence (U) on the indicators of the components (economic, social, environmental, institutional) of AIC sustainable development, in the range from low (<0.25) to high (>0.75). The value (U ̅ ), the formation of which is based on the principle of synergistic effect, reflects the cumulative (integral) impact of budgetary security indicators on the sustainability of AIC MD region development.

Result and discussion
Testing of the logically justified mechanism of the methodology in the analysis of specific sets of statistical data may reveal unaccounted prerequisites for unreliable results. This is possible, for example, if there is a strong or functional relationship between the values of the presented factors -budget indicators. In practice, this phenomenon may be explained by the established (well-established) proportions between expenditure items in the budget allocation at the regional level, and, consequently, in MD. But statistically, this would indicate the presence of an autocorrelation effect. Given that the methodology does not imply multiple correlation, but only pairwise correlation, the author considers it acceptable in such circumstances to leave all factors and the proposed interpretation of the research results for further analysis.

Conclusion
The use of mathematical methods made it possible to develop the author's methodology for quantitative assessment of the degree of connection of AIC development sustainability indicators and components from budgetary security (indicators of revenue and expenditure parts of the budget) of municipal districts. The methodology is designed for practical use in relation to statistical data of municipal districts; its results can be used to interpret the achieved level of socio-economic development at the regional and municipal levels, to assess the effectiveness of local government and regional executive authorities.