The pattern and predominant trend of region’s development could only be
established by analyzing its situation in correlative systems of sequential time
rankings. A single time profile (ranking) per se looks rather indefinite and
stochastic, especially in the middle of its range spread. The relative stability could
be found in marginal, or extreme, regions, i.e. the best and the worst in their
development.
As evidenced by statistical studies on correlative classifications in two sequential
time profiles, the coefficient of correlation of regions’ ranking proved to vary from
0.43 to 0.56. Graphically speaking, the rankings are noted for a fairly diffuse middle
portion and clearly-cut «tails».
This very circumstance proves heepful in identifying backward and most advanced
regions. Trends in the development of the rest of the regions could be assessed by
reviewing their rankings over sequential time spans and through their primary
factors. In this doing, it is imperative that the ranking distribution be considered in
individual time profiles, which is conducive to defining the singularities in ranks
distribution and to finding out the degree of nonhomogeneity in the totality of
regions under study.
4. Clustering of RF regions based on their typification
methodology
4.1. General differentiation of regions
Regional typification procedure set forth in Section 2 of this Statement enables one
to represent all the RF regions in a determinate order both for a single year and in
dynamics over the reforms-oriented years. The available statistics would permit
your overview of regional development behavior over the years 1992-1994.
Unfortunately, you will fail to make adequate correlations due to lack of some data,
e.g. unemployment level for the years 1992-1993. True, there will also be found a
wide range of representative indicators which provide for a fairly adequate data
correlation on a year-to-year basis.
15