The study of Russia's northern regions as frontier territories is the subject of this article. It has been shown that frontier territories are distinguished with special mechanisms of development and predominance of innovative projects in entrepreneurship. The management of the frontier territories is less centralized and depends more on personal and organizational qualities of local leaders. Distinctive features of the frontier territories brought about the fact that they have some specific demographic characteristics. One of the directions of the research is to clarify the question whether Russia's northern territories are frontiers or not at present time. This problem has been studied from two viewpoints. Firstly, on the basis of the authors' methodology the demographic indicators of Russia's northern territories were compared with the average Russian ones. Secondly, it has been estimated how special the management of the northern territories is in comparison with others.

The territory of the Arctic is of interest from the point of view of the strategic development of the economy. However, the industrialization of the Arctic zone is accompanied by both a positive and a negative influence on the country’s socio-economic development. An analytical review of the research which has been published previously allows us to discuss the issue of sustainable development in the Arctic through the prism of the theory of externalities. Considering this, the paper examines some relevant issues from the standpoints of the concept of sustainable development and scientific and technological progress. Against the background of the identified problems, the purpose of the research is to clarify management decisions in the field of internalization of the externalities of economic development of the Russian Arctic zone. As research methods, the authors have applied comparative analysis, dynamic analysis, the coefficient method, correlational analysis and cluster analysis. An analytical review of scientific works, research tooling and a statistical database concerning the development of the Russian Arctic zone provided the following scientific results: the category of “externalities” in the context of industrialization of the Arctic zone’s territories and their systematization in a number of areas (environmental, innovation, investment, infrastructure, social, etc.) has been clarified; some trends in the degree of neutralization of negative environmental externalities in terms of environmental problems (pollution capture, waste disposal, recycling and wastewater treatment) have been identified; the dynamics of investment per unit of environmental pollution in the context of environmental approaches have been elucidated; the efficiency of investments in environmental preservation measures in the territories of the Russian Arctic zone have been evaluated; positive innovative externality from the investment of own funds in the fixed capital of enterprises have been revealed; the typology of the subjects of the Russian Federation that form part of the Arctic zone, according to the criteria of the intensity of costs for neutralization of negative externalities (territories with high, moderate and low intensity of costs) have been suggested; and a package of measures in order to manage the external effects of economic development of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation in the context of sustainable development has been proposed. The practical significance of the results obtained lies in the possibility of taking all of them into account in the implementation of the state program “Socio-economic development of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation”, contributing to the qualitative development of the territories of the Russian Arctic and improving the well-being of the population of the corresponding constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

This article is devoted to the fundamental issue associated with contradiction between the growing geopolitical and economic importance and simultaneous rise in socio-economic loss in the Arctic zone of Russian Federation (AZRF), alongside with aggravation of structural disproportions of the economy and depletion of mineral reserves that had been prospected during the Soviet period, etc. The challenge ensues from the inconsistency of the declaratory orientation towards an innovation-driven economy to the extent of its domination in the government budget. However, actually, the mineral raw materials complex will in the foreseeable future define competitive advantage of Russia in the global economy, will be a donor for the national budget, the basis for modernization and the user of high technologies. At present the importance of the exploration of the Arctic is determined by the following governing factors. The first factor is the increased global fight for natural resources in the context of two diverse processes. The first process is strengthening of international cooperation for the efficient development in the severe environment and extreme territory of the Arctic. The second process is associated with the pursuit of state interests protected by each of the Arctic countries and by other countries laying their claims to areas of the Arctic. The second factor is the desirable compromise to be sought and achieved between missions of AZRF as the natural resource management zone, zone of scientific advance and technological modernization, zone of ecological cleanness as well as the territory inhabited by indigenous people, immigrants and adaptants. This article is an attempt to examine these most important issues towards the successful social, economic and ecological development of Russia. The research has been supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Grant No. 13-06-00030, and by the Russian Scientific Humanitarian Foundation, Grant No. 14-02-00128.

The purpose of the article is to review scientific ideas about the transformation of the Russian Arctic's socio-economic space in the context of geopolitics, macroeconomics, and intraregional factors of development. This review's significance is determined by the fundamental problems that accompany the development of the Russian Arctic, the growing importance of this territory for the national economy. These contradictions' objectivity is confirmed, which naturally indicated the shortcomings of economic theory, which does not allow us to solve these contradictions. For example, the contradiction between the high costs of functioning of the economy, social sphere and the need to raise the level of socio-economic development of the Russian Arctic; between the tasks of increasing the exploitation of resources and the requirements of the environment, etc., that is, what objectively makes it challenging to solve the problem of sustainable development of the Arctic. However, the numerous scientific studies considered, correlated with transformations in politics, economy, and demography, allowed us to assert that ideas have their driving force, influence, and provide transformational processes in the Arctic. The specificity and the strong influence of geopolitics on socio-economic transformations in the Russian Arctic are identified, but at the same time, the significance of the manifestation of expansionism as an internal human need for settlement, fame, and wealth is emphasized, which also ensures the development of the Arctic. Systemic changes are identified, socio-economic trends in the Russian Arctic are presented, which allowed us to establish the positive impact of modern policy on the development of the Russian Arctic, which marks a trend of reducing demographic losses. The prospects for the socio-economic development of the Russian Arctic are considered, taking into account the current situation of the coronary crisis, internal transformation processes, the influence of politics.

The paper presents the results of research about specifics of gross domestic product production in Russia using the tool of econometrics – production functions apparatus. Also, there are quantitatively found answers on questions, which have theoretical and methodological significance. First question – what has a decisive influencing on the production of gross domestic product in Russia, whether it is stocks or investments into the main fund? It was found that the decisive influence on the production of gross domestic product in Russia comes from investments into the main fund. Weak dependency of gross domestic product in Russia on capital stocks explains the inappropriateness of using capital stocks as a parameter of fund in production functions. Second question – what is the exact type of indicators that is preferred to use for characterizing the components of production function in conditions of the Russian economy – cost or natural? It is defined that is it possible to use both – cost terms indicators and indexes of physical volume. However, mining specifics of Russian economy defines the preference of using indexes of physical volume. Third question – what is the quality of economic growth of Russian economy during the period between 1996 and 2013? The intensive character of economic growth was found and the input of main factors of production into economic growth of Russian economy was measured. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n5s3p265