non-financial development institution
major organizer of congress and exhibition events
Welcome!
Восстановление пароля
Введите адрес электронной почты или телефон, указанные при регистрации. Вам будет отправлена инструкция по восстановлению пароля.
Некорректный формат электронной почты или телефона
Шипов Савва

Savva Shipov

Deputy Minister of Economic Development of the Russian Federation
Quotes
05.09.2019
EEF 2019
Digital State: New Business Models Brought by Total Digitalization
We now talk a lot about the speed of change. Can we change rapidly? Many things depend on this. We need to answer the question, how do we change, because our procurement system <…> clearly is not in line with the challenges we are facing. There is another problem of how legislation is changing; we can develop any services, but as long as legal framework is in place, we cannot implement them
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
The Potential and Prospects for Developing the Digital Economy in the Russian Regions
It is important to train people. Together with our colleagues from the Ministry of Digital Development and the Academy of Public Administration, we are making a programme for digital transformation leaders. This has a serious effect. People start thinking in a different fashion. We need to address it
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
The Potential and Prospects for Developing the Digital Economy in the Russian Regions
In order to build a data system, we need to adopt a statutory act – which will take a year – to approve changes to the budget, get the money, sign contracts and get the contract-stipulated work done. What you have on your mind will take 2–3 years. This is not how digitalization works. It only works if change is being permanently introduced. Until we change the system itself, regions will be unable to introduce digitalization
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
‘Regulatory Guillotine’: A New Look at Old Requirements
We should limit the life span of requirements. Applicability of every requirement must be reviewed. We think that the general rule for this span would be five years, but if an appropriate decision would be made, it can be extended to ten years
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
‘Regulatory Guillotine’: A New Look at Old Requirements
Unfortunately, we have many examples when the same entity is subject to the same requirements by different bodies – in this case they all come and check against the same requirements – or, which is worse – to different requirements that contradict each other. That is why we think it is necessary that the bill clearly rules such things out
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
‘Regulatory Guillotine’: A New Look at Old Requirements
We think it is important that all mandatory requirements are reviewed based on technological opportunities, the realities we live in. There will be no economic growth without that
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
‘Regulatory Guillotine’: A New Look at Old Requirements
The requirements are supposed to be clear for an entrepreneur. Any unexpected requirement is a ‘black swan’ that can critically affect business operations. Therefore, we think it is necessary to establish clear rules of enacting such requirements. We suggest determining two dates when and only when laws with new mandatory requirements can be enacted. In any case, time between adoption of such law and the enactment should be, at least, six months, so that everyone can get ready to avoid involuntary non-compliance
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
‘Regulatory Guillotine’: A New Look at Old Requirements
The first question is if the punishment matches the requirement. We suggest dividing the mandatory requirements into three groups: high-risk, medium-risk, and low-risk requirements. This must be based on the consequences of non-compliance. It is very important in this regard that the reform of ‘regulatory guillotine’ is being implemented simultaneously with drafting a new Administrative Code, because there is a direct connection between non-compliance with a mandatory requirement and administrative liability. We suggest revision of a scenario when non-compliance with a high-risk mandatory requirement would entail administrative liability, non-compliance with a medium-risk requirement would not directly entail liability, but an order would be issued. <…> And finally, we suggest that even no order would be issued in case of low-risk requirements, but recommendations would be given, which the entrepreneur would comply with without any sanctions
07.06.2019
SPIEF 2019
‘Regulatory Guillotine’: A New Look at Old Requirements
Some requirements must not be introduced throughout all the country at once, it can cause risks. That is why we suggest a possibility of legal experiments
15.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
Smart Regulation Tools for the Digital Economy
Smart regulation is a regulation based on the challenges that come from the society, from already established social relations
15.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
Smart Regulation Tools for the Digital Economy
Adoption of a bylaw takes over a year, adoption of a law – even longer, and, of course, we are left behind
15.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
Smart Regulation Tools for the Digital Economy
Let’s consider our anticorruption expertise: if regulation gives an official authority to use their own discretion, it means that this regulation has corruption capacity. But in practice we state the requirements in great detail, and once it is put it into a document, malevolent players who want to get around a law easily do that
15.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
Smart Regulation Tools for the Digital Economy
Have no right for mistake, we cannot be creative. On the other hand, authorities cannot afford mistakes. A solution here might be regulatory ‘sandboxes’
15.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
Smart Regulation Tools for the Digital Economy
Development of a platform where we could, so to say, in a ‘wiki’ mode create drafts of regulatory acts, and at the same time it would be expression of will by the authorities <…> Openness of the whole process, with logging of each step, understanding who introduced amendments. <…> Transition to such instruments would make it possible to adopt documents faster, more proficiently and, which is the most important thing, take responsibility for the proposed amendments
15.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
How Can We Protect Privacy in the Internet of Things Era?
We can impose as many bans as we like, but they will not work until our society is aware of the digital hygiene, until we together start preparing people for this future. Ignorance about data protection will always open access to them for malevolent people
15.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
How Can We Protect Privacy in the Internet of Things Era?
It is important for us to protect both opportunities for economic growth and privacy. <…> It is crucial not to include too much unnecessary stuff into the laws. We have to introduce the notions of public data, anonymized data; set standards of how data become anonymized; think how to prevent these data from being collected from different sources and allowing to identify a person again. These notions are necessary to move forward. It is still not clear how we should specify all rights and obligations of the involved participants
14.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
The Competitiveness of the National Jurisdiction: New Directions for Development
The initiative to reduce the number of mandatory requirements came from the entrepreneurial community. First, the entrepreneurs prepared a list of unsatisfactory requirements, and then, together with the economic block of the Government, with the Ministry of Justice, we started to convince the controllers that these requirements needed to be pared down. And then the controllers started making arguments against and <…> That conversation is where it all got stuck
14.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
The Competitiveness of the National Jurisdiction: New Directions for Development
It is important to ask ourselves the question: what does a modern, competitive jurisdiction look like? An ‘economy of trust’ allows us to avoid the huge costs of the facts that the government does not trust entrepreneurs and that people do not trust each other. An economy of trust allows us to create a new environment, resulting in a completely different type of economic growth. This is not just a legal issue, it is also a cultural one
14.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
Reform of Regulation and Oversight: New Directions
One of the major shortcomings of the existing system today is how verification is placed at the forefront as the primary, as the one and only measure carried out in regulation and oversight. […] We do not possess the tools that would allow us to solve a specific local problem without, on the one hand, seriously burdening the business while, on the other, the controller carried out the measure promptly. We need to see that verification ceases to function as regulation’s primary tool; the primary measures should be those that minimize interaction with the business while at the same time increasing the effectiveness of the regulation”
14.02.2019
Russian Investment Forum 2019
Reform of Regulation and Oversight: New Directions
The main reason for carrying out an inspection, both planned and unplanned, should be the triggering of risk indicators, and the entire set of regulation and oversight measures must be linked into a common understandable procedure. This will make it possible to establish clear rules and give the business a guarantee that no one will come to carry out an inspection without sufficient reason for doing so
26.05.2018
SPIEF 2018
Regulating the Technological Singularity: How Can We Open Doors to the New?
Our task is to create a mechanism to build the ‘sandboxes’ " for specific purposes and make it fast. <...> We must compile a basic master-description for all items possible, which must be identified when setting up the ‘sandbox’, and all possible parameters for these items. And then we need to create a decision-making system: how do we evaluate? Which items do we choose? What are the parameters for being present in the ‘sandbox’
26.05.2018
SPIEF 2018
Regulating the Technological Singularity: How Can We Open Doors to the New?
We must, probably, make regulation more individual, which would be an important objective
25.05.2018
SPIEF 2018
Achieving Strategic Objectives
If we can provide standard services, simple services, with legally relevant data on the basis of which decisions are made, we will be able to cease the huge expenditure of resources on people moving paper around and, among other things, making decisions.
24.05.2018
SPIEF 2018
The Transformation of Public and Private Sectors in the New Economy
If you look at companies that have gone ahead and created information systems, you’ll see that the main challenge for them is to keep changing these systems regularly so that they are constantly relevant. The question arises: how much time will it take the state to do this? Will the state be able to live in new information era if change takes several years? For example, the adoption of a regulatory act takes about a year
24.05.2018
SPIEF 2018
Moving from the Knowledge Economy to the Trust Economy
The Ministry of Economic Development is introducing a new system that will help change the attitude of the state to business during the oversight functions performance. This new approach is already applied in more than 15 different areas. Oversight depends on the company’s position within the five categories of risk of committing offenses. If the business is in a high or top category, then checks-ups happen every year. If a company is placed in the lower category, then control doesn’t happen regularly