Assessment of the transformational potential of Russia's creative sector: between a driver and a conglomerate

Problem. Despite the recognition of the creative sector as a driver of structural transformation in developed economies, there is no comprehensive quantitative assessment of the degree of its integration into global trends as applied to Russia. Existing studies are fragmentary, rely on outdated data, and do not account for the post-crisis transformation of 2022–2024, which hinders the development of sound economic policy. Aim. Based on a comparative analysis of quantitative indicators and institutional conditions, to identify the specific influence of the creative sector on the structural transformation processes of the Russian economy in the context of global trends and to determine the key barriers to realising its transformational potential. Methods. The study is based on a comprehensive methodology, including a comparative analysis of macroeconomic indicators of Russia, the United States, and China for 2021–2024 and a qualitative analysis of institutional factors. For a quantitative integral assessment, the authors developed the Global Trend Alignment Index (GTAI), which includes four components: digitalisation, exports, polycentrism, and institutions. Results. A fundamental gap was revealed between Russia and the leading countries: the share of the creative sector in Russia’s GDP reached 4.1 % (compared to 4.5–4.6 % in the US and China); however, this growth was driven primarily by the IT cluster. Exports of creative services decreased by more than fourfold, and employment in the sector is also insignificant – 1.55 % of the labour force (in the US – 3.23 %). Spatial hyperconcentration in the Central Federal District reached 68 % of gross value added. The GTAI for Russia was 0.28, corresponding to a low level of alignment with global trends. Conclusions. In its current state, the Russian creative sector represents not a unified agent of transformation, but a conglomerate of heterogeneous assets with conjunctural rather than structural growth. The identified imbalances require not an increase in funding, but a deep structural restructuring aimed at overcoming the gaps between technologies and content, the capital and the regions, and government procurement and market expansion.