Data Envelopment Analysis Method, Malmquist Productivity Index, catching-up strategy, innovation complementarity, new economic geography


The article is devoted to the problem of spatial inequality of regions caused by centripetal or centrifugal forces because of agglomeration effects and interaction costs. It corresponds with the main idea of new economic geography. A differentiated approach to regional development strategizing is proposed in the study as a tool for reducing the level of spatial imbalance. Herein the use of technological arbitrage (catching-up) strategy is proposed for peripheral regions by strengthening interregional interaction. In the paper, two hypotheses are investigated: (1) The economic growth of territories, caused by industry diversification, positive externalities from Research and Development, the quality of human capital, which are typical of the “center” type of regions and (2) The formation of a unified macroeconomic space is possible due to strategies of technological arbitrage (catching-up strategy) for peripheral regions. Its implementation is possible through innovation, industrial-technological, and trade-technological complementarity development of peripheral regions with the central regions. The research methods are: panel regression with fixed effects, Data Envelopment Analysis method, and Malmquist Productivity Index, paired interregional complementarity indices. The study focuses on 10 regions of Siberian Federal District in the Russia, which differ in scale, structure, and level of innovative economic development. The study results confirm the possibility of reducing the level of spatial inequality using catching-up strategies and innovation complementarity of the regions. These strategies proved only for technical efficiency leading regions with high index of complementarity. In regions with a low complementarity index and different industry profile, large-scale interregional cooperation has not been confirmed.

Article metrics


Alimohammadlou, M., & Mohammadi, S. (2016). Evaluating the Productivity Using Malmquist Index Based on Double Frontiers Data. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 230, 58–66.

Anokhin, S., Wincent, J., & Autio, E. (2011). Operationalizing opportunities in entrepreneurship research: Use of data envelopment analysis. Small Business Economics, 37, 39–57.

Anokhin, S., Wincent, J., & Ylinenpää, H. (2015). Technological Expansions, Catching-Up Innovations and Technological Shifts at the Regional Level: Conceptual Considerations and Empirical Illustration. Regional Studies, 50(8), 1433–1448.

Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (2004). Knowledge Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, 4, 2713–2739.

Berglund, K., & Johansson, A. W. (2007). Operationalizing opportunities in entrepreneurship research: use of data envelopment analysis. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19(6), 499–525.

Berkowitz, D., & DeJong, D. N. (2005). Entrepreneurship and Post-Socialist Growth. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 67(1), 25–46.

Carluer, F., & Sharipova, E. (2004). The unbalanced dynamics of Russian regions: Towards a real divergence process. East-West Journal of Economics and Business, 7(1), 11–37.;jsessionid=7313903F6DA04063DA9B4EB72F9AB59C?doi=

Coelli, Т. (1998). A Guide to DEAP Version 2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis (Computer) Program (Working Paper No. 96/08).

Combes, P.-P., Lafourcade, M., Thisse, J.-F., & Toutain, J.-C. (2011). The rise and fall of spatial inequalities in France: A long-run perspective. Exploration in Economic History, 48(2), 243–271.

Combes, P.-P., Mayer, T., & Thisse, J.-F. (2008). Economic Geography: The Integration of Regions and Nations. Princeton University Press.

Cooke, P., & Morgan, K. (1998). The Associational Economy: Firms, Regions, аnd Innovation. Oxford University Press.

Cornett, A. (2009). Aims and strategies in regional innovation and growth policy: A Danish perspective. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21(4), 399–420.

Doloreux, D., & Dionne, S. (2008). Is regional innovation system development possible in peripheral regions? Some evidence from the case of La Pocatière, Canada. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 20(3), 259–283.

EMISS. Government Statistics. (n.d.-a) Otgruženo tovarov sobstennogo proizvodstva, vipolneno rabot i uslug sobstvennimi silami s 2017 g [Output goods of own production, performed works and services on its own since 2017].

EMISS. Government statistics. (n.d.-b) Otgruženo innovacionnih tovarov sobstvennogo proizvodstva, vipolneno rabot i uslug sobstennimi silami (bez NDS, akcizov i drugih analogičnih platežey) s 2017 g [Output innovative goods of own production, performed works and services on its own (excluding VAT, excises and other similar payments) since 2017].

Feldman, M. P., & Audretsch, D. B. (1999). Innovation in cities: Science-based diversity, specialization and localized competition. European Economic Review, 43(2), 409–429.

Hill, F., & Gaddy, C. G. (2003). The Siberian Curse: How Communist Planners Left Russia Out in the Cold. Brookings Institution Press.

Garofoli, G. (1994). The industrial district of Lecco: innovation and transformation processes. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 6(4), 371–393.

Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth. The Bell Journal of Economics, 10(1), 92–116.

Hayek, F. A. (1945). The Use of Knowledge in Society. The American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530.

Heckscher, E. F., & Ohlin, B. G. (1991). Heckscher-Ohlin Trade Theory. The MIT Press.

Herzfeld, T. (2008). Inter-regional output distribution: A comparison of Russian and Chinese experience. Post-Communist Economies, 20(4), 431–447.

Jafari, Y. (2014). Malmquist Productivity Index for Multi Time Periods. International Journal of Data Envelopment Analysis, 2(1), 315–322.

Khalafyan, A. A., Borovikov, V. P., & Kalaidina, G. V. (2016). Teoriya veroytnostei, matematičeskaya statistika i analiz dannih: Osnovi teorii i praktika na kompjutere [Probability theory, mathematical statistics and data analysis: Fundamentals of theory and practice on the computer]. URSS.

Kirzner, I. (1973). Competition and Entrepreneurship. University of Chicago Press.

Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: An Austrian Approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 60–85.

Kolenikov, S. (2003). Prikladnoj ekonometričeskij analiz v statističeskom pakete Stata [Applied econometric analysis in the statistical package Stata]. Russian School of Economics.

Kolomak, E. A. (2013). Neravnomernoe prostranstvennoe razvitie v Rosii: obysneniya novoj ekonomičeskoj [Uneven Spatial Development in Russia: Explanations of New Economic Geography]. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 2, 132–150.

Krugman, P. R., Masahisa, F., & Anthony, J. V. (1999). The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade. The MIT Press.

Leamer, E. E., & Storper, M. (2001). The Economic Geography of the Internet Age. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(4), 641–665.

Lin, S., Lin, R., Sun, J., Wang, F., & Wu, W. (2021). Dynamically evaluating technological innovation efficiency of high-tech industry in China: Provincial, regional and industrial perspective. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 74, Article 100939.

Losch, A. (1954). Profit Maximisation. Temple University.

Malmquist, S. (1953). Index numbers and indifference surfaces. Trabajos de Estatistica, 4, 209–242.

Ouyang, W., & Yang, J.-b. (2020). The network energy and environment efficiency analysis of 27 OECD countries: A multiplicative network DEA model. Energy, 197(15), Article 117161.

Paluzie, E., Pons, J., & Tirado, D. A. (2004). The geographical concentration of industry across Spanish regions, 1856-1995. Review of Regional Research, 24(2), 143–160.

Rodriguez-Pose, A. (2011). Economists as geographers and geographers as something else: on the changing conception of distance in geography and economics. Journal of Economic Geography, 11(2), 347–356.

Rosés, J. R., Martínez-Galarraga, J., & Tirado, D. A. (2010). The Upswing of Regional Income Inequality in Spain (1860–1930). Exploration of Economic History, 47(2), 244–257.

Sahdev, N. K. (2016). Do knowledge externalities lead to growth in economic complexity? Empirical evidence from Colombia. Palgrave Communications, 2, Article 16086.

Samuelson, P. A., & Barnett, W. A. (Eds.). (2007). Inside the Economist's Mind: Conversations with Eminent Economists with William A. Barnett. Blackwell Publishing.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Harvard University.

Shane, S. (2000). Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities. Organization Science, 11(4), 448–469.

Sharma, S. C., Sylwester, K., & Margono, H. (2007). Decomposition of total factor productivity growth in U.S. States. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 4782, 215–241.

Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Liberty Fund.

TIBCO Software Inc. (2020). Data Science Textbook.

Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1996). The Institutionalization of Institutional Theory. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 175–190). ‎ SAGE Publications Ltd.

Troutt, M. D., Ehie, I. C., & Brandyberry, A. A. (2007). Maximally productive input-output units. European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 359–373.

Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A Review and Synthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, and Recommendations for Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.

Vuković, D., Jovanović, A., & Đukić, M. (2012). Defining competitiveness through the theories of new economic geography and regional economy. Journal of Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA, 62(3), 49–64.

Vuković, D., & Wei, L. (2010). Regional competitiveness: the case of Western China. Journal of Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvić” SASA, 60(1), 107–124.

Weber, A. (1929). Theory of the Location of Industries. University of Chicago Press.




How to Cite

Chistyakova, N., Mikhalchuk, A., Bocharova, Y., Akerman, E., & Tatarnikova, V. (2023). CATCHING-UP REGIONAL STRATEGY AS A TOOL TO REDUCE SPATIAL INEQUALITY. Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA, 73(1), 33–48.