Assessing the resilience of a regional market for medical industrial products

Regional Economic Systems in Resilient Conditions
Authors:
Abstract:

External constraints on regional medical industries make it important to preserve their production and technological capacity and to identify its erosion when resource indicators fail to capture it. The aim of the study is to develop and test an approach to assessing the resilience of a regional market for industrial medical products based on separate measurement of the resource and technology-carrier circuits. The methodological basis combines the evolutionary interpretation of regional resilience with the provisions of sectoral strategizing; resilience is operationalised along four dimensions — resistance, recovery, re-orientation and renewal. The empirical base was formed from federal statistical observation forms No. 1-tekhnologiya and No. 2-nauka for 2017−2025 by economic activity types 26.6 and 32.5, and from Voronezhstat materials; the annual flow of research and development expenditure was converted to constant 2018 prices. It is established that the resilience of the regional medical industrial complex splits into two diverging characteristics. After declining to 58.0−73.5% of the 2019 level, the resource circuit reached 206.0−315.2% by 2025, whereas the technology-carrier circuit contracted to 68.2% under full coverage and to 50.0% for the core, with the minimum falling in the final year of observation. The number of developer organisations fell from 10 to 2 while the number of developed technologies grew, indicating concentration of development. The share of applied technologies acquired abroad was 41.6%, and of in-house development 7.9%. The scientific novelty lies in identifying a transmission gap between the resource and technology- carrier circuits and in demonstrating that assessing sectoral resilience by resource indicators alone systematically overstates it. The results are applicable in designing sectoral monitoring systems at the regional level. Monitoring the regional medical-industrial complex — based on costs and personnel — identifies areas of prosperity even as the production base contracts. Dividing the indicators into two categories and tracking the divergence between them makes this contraction visible within the management cycle, rather than only after competencies have been lost. The results obtained are limited to a single region, two types of economic activity, and a seven-year observation period, during which some data series are incomplete. This also determines the directions for further research.

Funding:

The research was financially supported by the Russian Science Foundation, project “Managing the Development of the Market for Industrial Medical Products in the Context of Technological Sovereignty” (Agreement No. 26-28-20066; available online: https://rscf.ru/project/26-28-20066/). The authors express their gratitude to the Territorial Body of the Federal State Statistics Service for the Voronezh Region for providing data broken down by type of economic activity, which were used to construct the empirical basis for this study.

  • References

    1. Martin R., Sunley P. (2015) On the notion of regional economic resilience: conceptualization and explanation. Journal of Economic Geography, 15 (1), 1–42. DOI: 10.1093/jeg/lbu015

    2. Simmie J., Martin R. (2010) The economic resilience of regions: towards an evolutionary approach. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 3 (1), 27–43. DOI: 10.1093/cjres/rsp029

    3. Gamidullaeva L.A. (2024) Regional economic resilience: bibliometric analysis of the research. π-Economy, 17 (1), 70–87. DOI: 10.18721/JE.17105

    4. Merzlikina G.S., Mogharbel N.O. (2026) Sustainability vs resilience of the regional economy. Upravlencheskii uchet [Management accounting], 3, 237–246. DOI: 10.25806/uu-6038

    5. Kvint V.L., Novikova I.V., Alimuradov M.K., Sasaev N.I. (2022) Strategizing the National Economy during a Period of Burgeoning Technological Sovereignty. Administrative Consulting, 9, 57–67. DOI: 10.22394/1726-1139-2022-9-57-67

    6. Sasaev N.I. (2023) Strategic Diagnostics of Russia’s Sectoral Development. Economic Revival of Russia, 3 (77), 139–154. DOI: 10.37930/1990-9780-2023-3-77-139-154

    7. Sasaev N.I. (2021) Theoretical and methodological foundations of strategic trend analysis in industrial strategizing. Models, systems, networks in economics, technology, nature and society, 4, 5–15. DOI: 10.21685/2227-8486-2021-4-1

    8. Potaptseva E.V., Akberdina V.V. (2023) Technological Sovereignty: Concept, Content, and Forms of Implementation. Journal of Volgograd State University. Economics, 25 (3), 5–16. DOI: 10.15688/ek.jvolsu.2023.3.1

    9. Garina E.P., Kuznetsov V.P. (2025) National priorities and regional aspects of ensuring technological leadership in Russian industry. Vestnik of Lobachevsky University of Nizhni Novgorod. Series Social Sciences, 3 (79), 25–37. DOI: 10.52452/18115942_2025_3_25

    10. Savchenko E.E. (2024) Regional aspect of technological sovereignty: priority development vectors. Journal of Economics, Entrepreneurship and Law, 14 (9), 5105–5120. DOI: 10.18334/epp.14.9.121551

    11. Goryacheva T.V., Myzrova O.A. (2023) Podkhod k klassifikatsii faktorov, okazyvayushchikh vliyanie na formirovanie i razvitie tekhnologicheskogo suvereniteta Rossiyskoy Federatsii [An approach to the classification of factors influencing the formation and development of technological sovereignty of the Russian Federation]. Innovation activity, 2 (65), 29–42.

    12. Abdikeev N.M., Abrosimova O.M., Fufaev M.D. (2025) Assessing the impact of intelligent industrial production factors on achieving technological sovereignty. Business. Education. Law, 3 (72), 13–18. DOI: 10.25683/VOLBI.2025.72.1374

    13. Kovalchuk J., Stepnov I. (2019) Research of the Technological Future's Uncertainty. MGIMO Review of International Relations, 12 (6), 214–224. DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-2019-6-69-214-224

    14. Shelomentsev A.G., Goncharova K.S., Stepnov I.M., Kovalchuk J.A., Lan D.H., Golov R.S. (2021) Strategic Innovation as a Factor of Adaptation of National Economies to the Development of Global Value Chains. Sustainability, 13 (17), art. no. 9765. DOI: 10.3390/su13179765

    15. Stepnov I.M., Kovalchuk Yu.A. (2020) Measuring value created by business models in the sharing economy. The Manager, 11 (5), 58–69. DOI: 10.29141/2218-5003-2020-11-5-5

    16. Danilov D.A., Danilov A.D. (2024) Development of the market for industrial medical products in the context of digitalization and Industry 5.0. π-Economy, 17 (5), 45–60. DOI: 10.18721/JE.17503

    17. Danilov D.A. (2024) Theoretical provisions of the development of the market of industrial products for medical purposes in the conditions of digitalisation of the economy. Organizer of production, 32 (2), 73–81. DOI: 10.36622/1810-4894.2024.39.34.007

    18. Danilov D.А. (2025) Analytical aspects of market maturity research in the context of innovative development of the market for industrial medical products. Economics and Management: Problems, Solutions, 9 (9 (162)), 126–132. DOI: 10.36871/ek.up.p.r.2025.09.09.013

    19. Morozova Yu.A. (2025) Strategic trends in the innovative development of the medical industry in Russia and the world. Russian Journal of Industrial Economics, 18 (3), 421–432. DOI: 10.17073/2072-1633-2025-3-1488

    20. Yakovlev G.I., Streltsov A.V. (2023) Features of the organization of import-substituting production of high-tech medical products. Bulletin of the Altai Academy of Economics and Law, 5, 162–169. DOI: 10.17513/vaael.2822

    21. Zuyenkova Y.A. (2024) Analysis of the market of innovative medical products to assess investment potential. Vestnik MIRBIS [Bulletin of Moscow International Higher Business School], 4 (40), 139–149. DOI: 10.25634/MIRBIS.2024.4.16

    22. Samoylova A.V. (2025) Transformation of the medical device market: trends, solutions, and development prospects. Vestnik Roszdravnadzora, 5, 6–19.

    23. Tonkonog V.V. (2024). The issues of development and functioning of common market of medical equipment and articles within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union. Problemy sotsial'noi gigieny, zdravookhraneniia i istorii meditsiny, 32 (4), 778–784. DOI: 10.32687/0869-866X-2024-32-4-778-784

    24. Zolotov A.A. (2024) Global trends and competitive opportunities of Russia in the global market of medical devices. Economics: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, 14 (4А), 135–147.

    25. Andrew G.F. (2025) Global Medical Products Market in the Early 2020s.. Russian Foreign Economic Journal, 3, 116–130. DOI: 10.24412/2072-8042-2025-3-116-130

    26. Ozhgikhin I., Rudskaya I., Abdulayeva I. (2023) Analysis of the Medical Equipment Market of the Russian Federation: Features and Prospects of Its Development. Sustainable Development and Engineering Economics, 2 (8), 40–52. DOI: 10.48554/SDEE.2023.2.3

    27. Mejtoft T., Lindahl O., Öhberg F., Pommer L., Jonzén K., Andersson B.M., Eklund A., Wåhlin A., Hallberg P. (2022) Medtech innovation guide: an empiric model to support medical technology innovation. Health and Technology, 12, 911–922. DOI: 10.1007/s12553-022-00689-0

    28. Garcia Gonzalez-Moral S., Beyer F.R., Oyewole A.O., Wainwright L., Craig D. (2023) Looking at the fringes of MedTech innovation: a mapping review of horizon scanning and foresight methods. BMJ Open, 13 (9), art. no. e073730. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073730

    29. Krämer A., Franco C., Hartung-Linz F., Thom E. (2026) Medical Device Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Markets, Marketing, and Regulations, Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-032-03577-6

    30. Zhou K., Gattinger G. (2024) The Evolving Regulatory Paradigm of AI in MedTech: A Review of Perspectives and Where We Are Today. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 58, 456–464. DOI: 10.1007/s43441-024-00628-3

    31. Kucherenko A.I. (2025) Conceptual aspects of evaluating the effectiveness of national projects in the context of achieving technological leadership. Upravlencheskii uchet [Management accounting], 2, 109–118. DOI: 10.25806/uu-5051

    32. Gareev T.R. (2023) Technological sovereignty: From conceptual contradiction to practical implementation. Terra Economicus, 21 (4), 38–54. DOI: 10.18522/2073-6606-2023-21-4-38-54

    33. Babkin A.V., Merzlikina G.S. (2025) Sustainable development of economic systems: Essential content and evaluation criteria. Economics and Management, 31 (7), 834–853. DOI: 10.35854/1998-1627-2025-7-834-853

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Previous articleNext article