in emphasizing the impossibility of systemic and
long-term social and economic development of a
specific territory (location, municipality, region,
macro region) without changing the existing
scientific and managerial approaches to
understanding the fundamental subjectivity of the
resident population as the main beneficiary of the
regional economy and solving the national economic
problem of a regional scale to increase the quality and
scale of social, social and economic interactions as
the basis for progressive and productive local and
regional economic activity.
Strengthening such forms of activity, in turn,
requires the implementation of local and regional
scenarios of expanded reproduction and social and
economic development, which are impossible outside
the infrastructural form of organizing the
corresponding processes. The needs of the population
of the territory for infrastructural services are specific
reasons and should act as the basis for choosing
directions for the development of regional social
infrastructure as a critically important component of
the regional economy, which determines the rates and
proportions of regional production and reproduction
processes.
The applied implementation of the priorities of
sustainable, balanced and systemic regional social
and economic development currently requires the
advanced development of the regional and the
municipal and local social infrastructure that form it,
while the growth of the regional competitiveness of
Krasnodar Krai directly depends on the improvement
of the characteristics of the reserve group of regional
labor potential, including in terms of developing and
improving the characteristics of regional human
capital - permanent residents of the territory with
entrepreneurial and innovative competencies. Such
dynamics is possible only with full-fledged social and
infrastructural support of local, municipal and
regional scale and requires appropriate targeted
efforts, the implementation of which will ensure the
mobilization and productive use of internal social and
economic factors and reserves in the regional
economy.
REFERENCES
Alberio, M., Sousa, J. (2020). The Resilient and Innovative
Spirit of the Nonprofit and Social Economy .University
of Alberta Libraries in Canadian Journal of Nonprofit
and Social Economy Research Canadian Journal of
Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, Volume 11,
pp 5-5; doi:10.29173/cjnser.2020v11n2a400
Antonyuk, V.S., Danilova, I.V., Mitel'man, S.A.,
Bulikeyeva, A.Zh. (2015). Upravleniye sotsial'noy
infrastrukturoy regionov v sisteme instrumentov
povysheniya kachestva zhizni naseleniya regionov.
Ekonomika regiona, 3:53-66. doi 10.17059/2015-3-5
Afonasova, M.A. (2018). K voprosu o drayverakh rosta
ekonomiki i kachestva zhizni naseleniya sel'skikh
territoriy. Alleya nauki, 5:256-259.
Balobanov, A.Ye., Golubev, S.V. (2012). Kachestvo zhizni
– klyuchevoy parametr sovremennoy strategii
mirovogo goroda. X Obshcherossiyskiy forum liderov
strategicheskogo planirovaniya: doklady uchastnikov.
SPb., Leont'yevskiy tsentr, 109–118.
Bykovskaya, I.V. (2012). Rol' i znacheniye sotsial'noy
infrastruktury v funktsionirovanii regional'nykh
sotsial'no-ekonomicheskikh sistem. Aktual'nyye
voprosy ekonomicheskikh nauk, 27:82-85.
Busquet, G. (2011). Spatial determinism and territorial
public action in France: Challenges and evolutions.
Journal of urban and regional analysis. 1 III. DOI:
10.37043/JURA.2011.3.1.5
Degil', O.V. (2012). Metodika opredeleniya kachestva
zhizni naseleniya regiona na osnove kompleksnogo
indikatora kachestva zhizni. Global'nyy nauchnyy
potentsial. №11: 132-138.
Galitskaya, V.A. (2018). Osobennosti sotsiokul'turnoy
modernizatsii v Tomskoy oblasti (na primere analiza
gosprogramm «innovatsionnoye razvitiye i
modernizatsiya ekonomiki» i «novoye kachestvo
zhizni»). Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo
universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya. 45:
138-145. DOI: 10.17223/1998863Х/45/14
Glass, M.R., Addie, J.-P. D.,Nelles, J. (2019). Regional
infrastructures, infrastructural regionalism. Regional
Sudies, pp. 1651-1656.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1667968
Hefferan, M., Fern, A., (2018). Questioning the value of
government support for start-up, knowledge-intensive
companies: emerging evidence and future options.
Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, Vol. 24, No.
1, pp. 78-95
Klimenko, O.I., Botalova M.Ye. (2018). Obzor
metodicheskogo instrumentariya otsenki regional'nogo
razvitiya sotsial'noy infrastruktury. Vestnik
Belgorodskogo universiteta kooperatsii, ekonomiki i
prava, 1(68):64-74.
Kozma, D.E. (2019). Comparative analysis of the
sustainable development strategies and indicators of the
V4. Deturope, 11(2):101-120.
Marques, T.S., Saraiva, M., Santinha, G., Guerra, M.
(2018). Re‐Thinking Territorial Cohesion in the
European Planning Context. Paper in regional
science.pp.547-572. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2427.12608.
Matz Dahlberg I. B. (2020). Immigration, new religious
symbols, and the dynamics of neighborhoods. Journal
of regional Science. 8(12),pp. 929-958.
Minyakova, T.Ye. (2012). Uroven' zhizni naseleniya:
perspektivy i tendentsii razvitiya (na primere Rossii i
Kitaya). Ul'yanovsk, UlGTU, 135 s.
ISSDRI 2021 - International Scientific and Practical Conference on Sustainable Development of Regional Infrastructure