FUNCTIONING OF BUDGETARY RESERVE FUNDS AT THE NATIONAL AND SUB-NATIONAL LEVELS. FOREIGN EXPERIENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relevance of studying the practices of the functioning of sovereign funds in different countries of the world is due to the need to ensure financial stability in the current economic situation. Analysis of foreign experience allows us to identify proven tools for managing state assets and reserves that can be applied in Russia. The purpose of the study is to establish the key features of foreign budget funds: goals of creation, investment strategies, procedures for use for the purposes of macroeconomic stabilization and sustainable development. The object of the study was the mechanismfunctioning of budgetary reserve funds in foreign countries. The research hypothesis was that the management of budgetary reserve funds at the national and subnational levels involves the formation of certain rules and mechanisms that can be adapted to the conditions of the Russian economy, and the efficiency of the functioning of reserve funds depends oncertain factors, for example, the level of financial independence of the subject and legal regulation. According to the results of the study,In countries with a multi-level fiscal system, the success of countercyclical fiscal policy largely depends on the degree of coordination of the actions of national and subnational authorities. At the subnational level, successful stabilization funds were found to operate in Canada, the USA and the UAE. The novelty of the study lies in the description of foreign experience in operatingbudgetary reserve funds mainly at the subnational level. International best practices are summarized and their applicability in various contexts is assessed.The study expands knowledge about the management of budgetary reserve funds at different levels of government, providing an overview of international experience in this areas. The research methodology is based on comparative analysis, which allows us to identify examples of best practices in the functioning of reserve budget funds.funds and identify factors influencing their effectiveness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".