Geographical Features of Federal Support for the Development of Russian Cities Through the Mechanism of Interbudgetary Transfers

Bibliographic Data

ID19228113
AuthorsD Yu Zemlyanskii (The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, corresponding author), Л В Калиновский (The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, corresponding author), L V Kalinovskii, Д М Медведникова (0000-0002-6714-7192, The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, corresponding author), D M Medvednikova
Year2026
Volume16
Issue1
Pages63-74
Publication date2026-03-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueRegional Research of Russia (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2079-9713 • E-ISSN: 2079-9705
PublisherPleiades Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1134/s2079970525600994
OpenAlexW7161247562
LanguageEN
References cited16

The article examines the geographical differences in the distribution of direct federal financial support, implemented through the system of interbudgetary relations, among municipalities of Russia that include cities. Based on Federal Treasury data, a database of consolidated budgets of Russian municipalities for 2020–2024 was compiled for this article. Of all municipal budget revenues, only those received as a result of federal support measures in the form of targeted interbudget transfers were identified. It has been established that support is distributed across municipalities generally in proportion to their population size, but some priority is observed in relation to small ones. Larger cities and municipalities with populations between 50 000 and 100 000 receive smaller amounts of support. There is no clear priority given to rural areas over cities. The factor of having the status of a regional capital is not significant in the distribution of support. The structure of support funds by sectors varies significantly between urban municipalities of different population sizes: in small cities, support is skewed toward environmental solutions, while in large cities, the focus is shifted to the development of education, transport infrastructure, and environmental policy. Geographically, priority is given to geostrategic territories and cities located in regions with lower levels of budgetary security

Government (linguistics) · Mechanism (biology) · Regional Economic Development and Innovation · Regional Socio-Economic Development Trends · Socioeconomic and Demographic Analysis

Tools

Open DOI