Typology of Russian agribusiness ecosystems

   In the agricultural sector of Russia, an independent market of digital platforms and ecosystems is actively developing, which leads to a variety of their organisational forms and differentiation of business models.

   The purposes of the study are to develop classification criteria and, on their basis, form a typology of existing platform and ecosystem decisions in the Russian agro-industrial complex.

   The following classification criteria are proposed: role of the ecosystem core in business, industry localization, and product specialisation. According to the first criterion, all ecosystems are divided into core companies complementary to the main business and independent ones. According to the second criterion, they are divided into universal and industry-specific, while the latter can be part of the universal ones. Considering the third criterion, the following elements are identified and described in detail: specialised product marketplaces (B2B (business-to-business) for wholesale, B2B and B2C (business-to-customer) for retail, B2B for supply, B2B for procurement and mixed ones); logistics platforms; financial platforms and aggregator sites. Emerging multi-functional industry ecosystems offering comprehensive products for agribusiness are separately highlighted as well as government services and platforms implementing individual functions of government administration in the industry.

1. Gawer A. Digital platforms and ecosystems: remarks on the dominant organizational forms of the digital age. Innovation. 2021;1(24):110–124. doi: 10.1080/14479338.2021.1965888

2. Shastitko A.E., Kurdin A.A., Filippova I.N. Meso-institutions for digital ecosystems. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2023;2:61–82. (In Russian). doi: 10.32609/0042-8736-2023-2-61-82

3. Ramenskaya L.A. The concept of ecosystem in economic and management studies. The Manager. 2020;4(11):16–28. (In Russian). doi: 10.29141/2218-5003-2020-11-4-2

4. McIntyre D.P., Srinivasan A. Networks, platforms, and strategy: emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management Journal. 2017;1(38):141–160. doi: 10.1002/SMJ.2596

5. Jacobides M.G., Cennamo C., Gawer A. Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal. 2018;8(39):2255–2276. doi: 10.1002/smj.2904

6. Treiber M., Theunissen Th., Grebner S., Witting J., Bernhardt H. How to successfully orchestrate content for digital agriecosystems. Agriculture. 2023;5(13):1003. doi: 10.3390/agriculture13051003

7. Korobeynikova O.M., Gorbacheva A.S., Chekrygina T.A., Vorotnikov M.D. State regulation of agribusiness activities in digital ecosystems. Kazan Economic Bulletin. 2022;4:14–18. (In Russian).

8. Korobeynikova O., Korobeynikov D., Popova L., Chekrygina T., Melikhov V. Russian agribusiness and digital ecosystems: ways of interaction. In: XV International Scientific Conference “INTERAGROMASH 2022” : Proceedings, volume 1, Rostov-on-Don, May 25–27, 2022. Cham: Springer; 2023. Pp. 1205–1215. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-21432-5_128.

9. Thomas L.D.W., Autio E. Modeling the ecosystem: a meta-synthesis of ecosystem and related literatures. In: DRUID Summer Conference : Proceedings, Copenhagen, June 19–21, 2012. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School; 2012.

10. Shkarupeta E.V. Managing the development of industrial complexes in the context of reindustrialisation. Diss. … Dr. Sci. (Econ.): 08.00.05. Moscow: National University of Science and Technology; 2019. 356 p. (In Russian).

11. Korobeinikov D.A. Digital ecosystem model of the agro-industrial complex. Vestnik universiteta. 2023;1:83–91. doi: 10.26425/1816-4277-2023-1-83-91

12. Pomerantseva N. Banks on display: how digital platforms are developing in the financial sector. Expert. 2024;7(6):32–39. (In Russian).

13. Korobeinikova O.M., Ocheretyanaya D.V., Peters I.A., Shaldokhina S.Yu. Digital ecosystems for agribusiness. Agrarian Russia. 2022;6:40–47. (In Russian). doi: 10.30906/1999-5636-2022-6-40-47