Here is an interesting read on how Russia is attempting to emulate the Silicon Valley on a 1000 acre stretch of land located an hour away from central Moscow
http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/09/skolkovo-15b/
I found a few points quite interesting:
http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/09/skolkovo-15b/
I found a few points quite interesting:
- The project has an aim beyond promoting entrepreneurship- to diversify the Russian economy away from its dependency on natural resources. This seems similar to the recent tourism infrastructure revolution in Dubai which too has realized that it can't rely on its oil resources for much longer. I found this interesting because the cause-effect relation seems to have reversed here: the construction of a road is not leading to economic benefits but rather the economic benefits are driving the construction of the road (not the best analogy but gets the essence).
- It gives a good example of political motivation- the Medvedev-Putin friction.
- It is also an example of PPP as Siemens, Cisco, Samsung etc. have agreed to set up R&D facilities in Skolkovo.
- It shows that governments are sometimes willing to go a long way to attract FDI- the 'Startup visas' look like a first.
I do not think that this model is going to work out too well because-
- The need is not the driver of the project- is the Russian community ready to build a Valley of their own?
- Even if the returns exist they may be too slow in coming up- is the government going to be ready to invest for a long run with hopes of future benefits
4 comments:
I personally feel that the Skolkovo project is not an infrastructure project in the true sense(neither is it for public use or does it provide direct service). It is just a means adopted by the Russian government to boost the economy through foreign investment by providing a favorable environment for companies and new start ups.
I would like to know others opinion on the same.
It does seem like something that would lead to the development of more infrastructure in that area in the long run, but on its own I wouldn’t call it infrastructure either. It’s more of a group of assets to corporate entities in its current status.
Guys I never called it an infrastructure project and nor did I intend to debate if it was one. It is just an interesting investment, the pros and cons of which can strike an interesting debate. Its impacts can be multi-layered and far reaching and also insignificant. A lot of dynamics can impact its growth or stagnation and I found the exercise of exploring the possibility quite interesting.
Point taken.
Another interesting point is that the city aims to be completely sustainable with zero harmful emissions. Lower water consumption, energy requirements...theoretically, the whole package. The use of combustion engines is even prohibited within the city!
Any idea when construction will be complete and the city will be fully functional?
Post a Comment