They have developed the idea about the theoretical essence of the regional socio-economic system innovation development, opened the meaning of the regional socio-economic system strategic adaptation, substantiated its necessity in the time of the Russian economy transition to the innovation development, and suggested the conception of the strategic adaptation.

The understanding of the nature of the regional socio-economic system conception of self-conception under consideration in the rank of the Russian Federation is being developed. Adaptation is considered one of the key functions of self-developing system. Its implementation is determined by the internal resources of the system, external to the system of macro-economic backgrounds and value coordinates of the system. The concept of adaptive capacity is expanded, the criteria for its evaluation is summarized. We present a conceptual framework of methodical approach to evaluating the potential of the regional socio-economic system. In particular, the adaptive potential of isolated two components, each of which includes subpotentsialy, is highlighted. The results of calculating the adaptive capacity of the author's method on the example of Sverdlovsk region in the pre-crisis period 2006-2007. and the crisis period 2008-2009 are presented. The calculations allow us to estimate the adequacy of conducted anti-crisis measures.

This paper develops ideas about the environmental performance assessment in the federal districts and subjects of the Russian Federation. Relevance of the topic is determined by the need to build a new system of environmental relations in terms of current society modernization, transition to the economy on an innovative type of development. The research methodology is based on the ongoing situation in Russia, the administrative reform, involving the compulsory institutionalization of evaluation of socio-economic impact of the government. The foreign practice of estimating the state environmental monitoring and inspection activities is analyzed. The characteristic of the current national system of assessment and the directions of its development is given. Amendments to the existing system of indicators to measure compliance and enforcement of territorial bodies of the Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resources are proposed. The results of testing of the proposed system of indicators for the departments of the federal districts of Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resource Usage are described.

The article considers how the potential of estimation of policy in the SCO member countries (Republic of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Republic of Tajikistan, Republic of Uzbekistan and Russian Federation) is being realized. By characterizing forming and developing institute of estimation of policy the prime attention is given to the period and the reasons of an appearance; to allocating stages of development; to the institutional environment (to normative acts, methodical tools); to the types of estimating most actively used; to target audiences; to the mechanism of involvement of the public and experts; to object of estimation (spheres of estimating activity). As a result of the short analysis of the situation developed in member countries of the SCO around formation of institute of policy estimation, the author draws a conclusion that these processes gain in each state the national specifics caused not only by strategic objectives of socioeconomic and political development, but first of all, by the directions and results of administrative reforms carried out. Herewith are being preserved certain common problems including insufficient understanding role of estimation both as an administrative tool and as a mechanism of forming civil society. A consequence is a low demand on estimation from the state structures; absence of the national organizations for estimation; a lack of vocational level of the qualified estimators; weak readiness of own methodological base; information isolation of results even of estimating researches carried out etc.

The article presents the results of the study, which purpose was to test the hypotheses reflecting the interaction of the development of the commodity sector with the socio-economic dynamics. The regional comparative studies and concepts reflecting different views on the relationship of the commodity sector and national development were the methodological basis. The 15 former Soviet republics, united among themselves in four regions: countries with rich natural resources; the country is not rich with natural resources; new EU countries and Russia — were the object of the study. In the context of the selected groups, the key macroeconomic indicators, human and institutional developments were analyzed in comparison. In the conclusion, the authors believe that today, countries having a rich natural resource potential, have the problem of the choice of the natural resources rational using model. While the country is in a state of search, it is very difficult to say clearly about the influence of the raw materials sector on economic development.

In the article, the results of the research, which purpose is to ground and assess the factors of economic growth of regional integration communities and national economies of member countries that develop them, are presented. The foreign trade, mutual trade turnover, and domestic demand are allocated as such factors. The authors has applied the novelty in their methodology which in contrast to the traditional assessment method of growth factors of integration communities and their participants, is based on comparison of two components — external and domestic demand, based on dividing the external demand on two components: the first one is pure export (the difference between export and import is a component of cumulative demand) of goods in integration community, i.e. the pure export of mutual trade; the second one is a pure export of foreign trade of goods outside of the integration association. Scope of the research is seven most known regional integrated units arose at different times and being at different stages of development — the European Union, North American Free Trade Area, Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Southern American Common Market, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, and also member countries of the Eurasian integration — the Customs Union and Common Free Market Zone developed into the Eurasian Economic Union in January 1, 2015. In conclusion, it is noted that the integration develops successfully only in the conditions of the rise in national economies of the participating countries. Crisis economies have to deal more with internal problems than to resolve integration issues.