{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023808322824716267, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011424968474148802, 'mean_word_length': 5.351273426237386, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
SHAPING A COMPREHENSIVE GOVERNMENT-SUPPORTED COUNTRY BRAND PROGRAM

Country brand support programs are instruments of open protectionism, which results from unilateral sanctions by foreign countries or acts as a mechanism for direct government support of national producers, creating positive perception by customers abroad and promoting goods and services to foreign markets. However, the long-term preservation of protectionist measures in the national economy leads to the loss of competitiveness by producers and the national economy as a whole. Therefore, it becomes relevant to study the programs of several states in the context of the development of national production and exports, and search for approaches to shaping a comprehensive program of government support for the country brands, which correspond to the main fair competition features in the global economy based on agreements within the WTO. This study is aimed at identifying the feasibility of transforming the “Made in Russia” initiative into a comprehensive country brand government support program. The methodological tools of the studied problem are based on expert and mutual assessments, the Delphi method, mathematical statistics, and graphical modeling. The expert assessment method was used to substantiate the expediency of protectionism for domestic producers to preserve quality and environmental friendliness of exportoriented products in the current conditions that contribute to cultivating the country’s positive image. A cause-and-effect diagram (the socalled Fishbone Diagram) developed on the basis of the K. Ishikawa model made it possible to identify the main causes and conditions for shaping a comprehensive program for the country brand government support.


Introduction
As a rule, the development of national brand support programs, as evidenced by the world practice, is subordinated to two interrelated tasks: national economy restructuring and implementing strategic national tasks related to long-term development and increasing the international competitiveness of domestically manufactured products (Mahrinasari, 2019;Chowdhury, Sanjoy, 2020).
In macroeconomic terms, global financial instability and violation of the fair competition rules in the world economy is a prominent issue (Posen, 2018;Vasiljeva, 2012). In accordance with the global trends, exportability of products is not considered a priority, because programs are auxiliary tools that make goal setting more sound by combining tools to support production and promote the export of products and services into a single complex. In the studies of Szakonyi (2019), the exportability of goods is determined by the quality of the delivered products and price competitiveness rather than by the formation of certain preferences because of the product country-oforigin effect.
According to Workman (2020), the Russian Federation's economy in 2017-2018 had a stable indicator (26.2%) in terms of the export quota, which practically ensured its invulnerability from external factors. In 2017-2018 the geography of exported Russian goods and services was characterized as follows: approximately 54.5% were delivered to European countries; 36.8% to Asia, 3.8% to Africa, 3.4% to North America and 1.2% to Latin America and the Caribbean, excluding Mexico. By 2025, the value of exports is expected to increase to USD 500 billion, including non-resource exports that will make up to USD 200 billion (Knobel, 2018).
The "Made in Russia" initiative to promote Russian goods and brands abroad is designed to confirm fair practices of domestic manufacturers and their reliability as a supplier of quality products. In this regard, the "Made in Russia" provides a general indication of the quality and environmental friendliness of the product. A positive perception of product brands and companies cultivates a strong image of the country, positively influencing consumers' purchasing decision (Kapustina et al., 2017, p. 2).
In brand support programs, the development goals and the transformation of the national economy structure are subordinated to national interests, which entails limitation of the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in terms of promoting the liberalization of the national economy, which directly contradicts the provisions of fair competition for a number of product groups and service sectors in the global economy based on agreements within the WTO. Vinogradov et al. (2019, pp. 38-39) devoted their research to the issues of trade and economic barriers, and they noted the opposite effect of the sanctions and restrictions imposed by initiating countries. While Bown (2017, p. 1) emphasized losses for "innocent" trading partners. According to Campbell (2018), such decisions resulted in an increase in the value of the importing companies and at the same time the prices for their products, which led to an increase in the cost of certain types of finished products.
According to the authors, it is advisable to provide a combination of short-term and long-term export promotion policies, including the harmonization of domestic and foreign trade policy tools. In the United States, for example, the primary goal of such a program was to create an environment within the country that promoted the consumption of goods and services produced domestically, and only afterwards it acquired the features of facilitating the transfer of real production from abroad to the U.S. In India, this program, along with all tools to support small and medium-sized entrepreneurs, is primarily aimed at creating a sustainable domestic market for

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2020 Volume 8 Number 2 (December) http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2(10) the consumption of domestically manufactured goods and services, and at implementing the task of intraeconomic circulation of goods and services between different states of the country. There is no single integrated "Made in Russia" program in the Russian Federation, but industry-specific government programs have been developed that have priority for the Russia's national economy and for economic positioning the country on the global stage.
When comparing consumer preferences for chocolate both in Russia and abroad (Dityashova, 2016), quality, customer awareness (including information indicated on the packaging), authenticity, safety, consumer novelty, image, and consumption price all play significant roles. This study was aimed at identifying effective industryspecific government programs that do not violate the foundations of fair competition in the global economy.
The purpose of the present study is to identify the feasibility of transforming the "Made in Russia" initiative into a comprehensive program to support the country brand. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks: -to analyze the positions of the leading countries in relation to brand support programs; -to identify methods for the formation of versatile tools for implementing the "Made in Russia" initiative; -to justify the application of governmental protectionist measures under uncertainty in the external environment when exporting products, provided the WTO rules are adhered to; -to develop a model for the formation of a comprehensive government-supported country brand program aimed at achieving a leading position in international competition.
While conducting the research, statistical data of surveys and empirical studies of scholars, government and marketing agencies were used. The formulated hypothesis of justified protectionism with government support for the country brand was one of the research results for the purposes of achieving liberal values based on compliance with the WTO rules.
The study is original since for the first time it has substantiated the need for protectionist measures in the form of government support for domestic producers of export-oriented products and the implementation of industryspecific programs to achieve the required level of quality and environmental friendliness in accordance with the WTO rules. These measures will make it possible to create a positive perception for the country brand, and to launch a comprehensive brand support program.
To achieve the objectives of the study, the production and export support programs applied in China, the USA and India were analyzed. The authors assessed the competitiveness of Russian goods and services depending on the product country-of-origin effect and the possibilities of using umbrella brands as a factor in promoting Russian products to foreign markets. The effects of the formation of sustainable preferences for Russian products were identified, and proposals were formulated with regard to the formation of versatile tools for implementing the "Made in Russia" initiative. The proposed cause-and-effect model for developing a comprehensive country brand support program will allow it to be adapted to the requirements of improving the national structural policy in the real sector, and achieving leadership in international competition.
Expert and mutual assessments, the Delphi method, mathematical statistics, and graphical modeling methods were employed in this research.
This analysis determined that the "Made in Russia" initiative is essentially an exclusive umbrella brand, and the development of a comprehensive program is necessary for the systemic governmental support. The elaborated cause-and-effect diagram of the structural-logical model to select conditions for the formation of the government- supported country brand program is of practical importance for the systematization of industry-specific programs to avoid violations of the foundations of fair competition, to solve the structural adjustment problems for the national economy, and to increase the international competitiveness of products manufactured in the country.

Literature review
Since the 1990s a discussion has unfolded: some researchers recognize that the product country-of-origin effect affects consumer choice, others deny its importance when making a purchasing decision (Dinnie, 2004, p. 168). Häuble and Elrod (1999, p. 205) are of the opinion that when consumers freely recognize the country of origin of the product, along with its brand, the perception of product quality becomes more positive. Without denying the existence of the product country-of-origin effect in international marketing, Agrawal and Kamakura (1999, p. 259), comparing the quality of similar products of individual firms, found a differentiation in the qualitative characteristics.
Approaches to country brand promotion are quite diverse. A number of scholars considered certain aspects of this issue in the following areas of research. Cowan and Guzman (2018) made a unique contribution to the dialogue about the influence of the country of origin on the effectiveness of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) signal, using the country-of-origin sustainable reputation of the brand (COSR) based on a comparison of sustainability signals and CSR. An interesting conclusion is that consumers' misperceptions about sustainable development affect domestic performance and brand equity. With regard to equity, consumer perception of CSR signals and sustainability contribute to increasing brand value and may be more effective for corporate brands with low or medium COSR ratings. The studies by Eng et al. (2016) showed that localization of international business results in different countries-oforigin effects in terms of compliance between a brand of origin and a country of production (COP). Both the country of production and the brand of origin may not coincide, which casts doubt on the impact of incompliance on the brand, consumer ethnocentrism and localization problems, especially when a well-known brand comes from a developed country and COP is in a developing country. The researchers expanded their past studies of the COO effect to find out if COP adversely affected the perception of a consumer product and the buyer's decision to purchase a well-known brand. Their studies showed that a brand origin was especially important for consumers in a developed country when evaluating products, while perceived brand image and price were key factors for consumers in a developing country. Wang et al. (2020) researched private-label brands as alternatives to national brands. In their opinion, low (vs high) status consumers are more attracted to national brands. Interestingly, this effect appeared only for products low, compared to high, in symbolism. In addition, their results showed that the interactive influence of power distance belief status and consumers on brand preferences was determined by consumers' status consumption needs. Cristea et al. (2015) examined the main moderating factors of the country of origin and analyzed their impact on consumer's brand perceptions at the cognitive, affective and regulatory levels. They suggested creating an optimal congruence between the country of origin and brand positioning elements.
Chan and Ilicic (2019) concluded that conservatism might be associated with stronger attachment bonds to brands. An important role could be played by the political ideology of consumers, which might result in their attachment to the domestic (as opposed to foreign) country of origin. Kotler and Gertner (2002) considered the extent of the impact made by the country's widespread images on its attitude towards its goods and services, and its ability to attract investment, business and tourists. They also evaluated the role of strategic marketing management in promoting the country's image, attractiveness and products.
The publication of Heslop et al. (2013) presented new insight into the reputational image transfers of mega-events and the places where they occurred. Thus, the Olympic Games in Beijing increased the reputation and image of neither the Olympic brand nor China, whereas in Vancouver they became positive for both. Bahadir et al. (2015) provided evidence that country-market characteristics moderated the relationship between the complete set of marketing mix elements and brand sales. While distribution and price had the greatest impact in developing and developed countries, product innovations and advertising had a much greater impact in emerging markets compared to developed countries. Zhou et al. (2010) confirmed that confidence in brand origin identification (CBO) mitigated the influence of perceived brand foreignness on consumer evaluations of brand value. Moreover, the moderating influence of CBO was more profound for local than for foreign brands. Their publication discussed the managerial implications for creating both global and local brands in emerging markets.
At different time periods Schooler (1965), Guina and Giraldi (2014), and Martynova (2018) concluded that there were differences in perceptions of the country of origin by different age groups.
A team of authors headed by Alpysbaeva (2017) studying the effects of integration, calculated the Lafay index and Balassa index for a country to identify the impact of international specifications on the formation of competitive advantages. It was determined that the level of product exportability was not significantly affected by prices, quality and expansion of market volumes within the EAEU.
However, with a large number of studies in this area, the problems of an integrated approach to shaping of government-supported country brand programs based on compliance with international standards and the fundamentals of economic liberalization have not been sufficiently studied. At the same time, the study of the problem of managing country brand promotion in the Russian economy is open and provides for the development of tools that correspond to the basic characteristics of fair competition in the global economy based on the WTO agreements.

Materials and methods
The analysis of the "Made in China 2025" program (MIC 2025) confirmed its comprehensive approach to supporting national development challenges. This program is an initiative aimed at securing China's position as a world leader in high-tech industries. MIC 2025 distinctive feature is its reliance on the development of the real ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2020 Volume 8 Number 2 (December) http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2 (10) sector of the national economy, which is defined as the basis for China to acquire the status of a world power. This program is targeted at reducing the country's dependence on imports of foreign technologies and investment, stimulating the development of the national economy, relying on domestic innovations, and forming the basis of the Chinese business community that will be able to compete, both domestically and in the world market. China considers the MIC 2025 as a chance to fully integrate into the global reproduction processes and the global value chains, acquiring a sufficiently high share in them (Perskaya, 2019, p. 39).
According to the research of Taguchi (2018, p. 9), a professor at Saitama University (Japan), the share of value added created in China is increasing, while value added in global value chains (GVCs) is decreasing in all production sectors because of foreign production. A study of the process of creating internal added value in China showed that, despite the support of manufacturing industries, the contribution of services (such as trade, utilities, other types of business) is significantly higher with the exception of sectors manufacturing food and metal products, where, according to the Chinese statistics, rural farming and mining are basic industries. Driven by MIC 2025 program, the Chinese economy has entered a phase of restoration of domestic production of value added, stimulating development through domestic consumption. An increase in China's share in GVCs as part of infrastructure projects contributes to large-scale restructuring of the Chinese economy (Yi, 2018, p. 3). The main problem of the "Made in China 2025" program is the toolkit for its implementation, since it applies exclusively administrative methods, subordinate to the decisions of the party bodies.
According to the expert assessment, the economic community of developed countries takes MIC 2025 program quite sharply, seeing it as a threat to fair competition in the world market. The transition from labor-intensive industries and an increase in the share of Chinese manufacturers in value chains with rising wages are determined as the main development paths for China aiming to prevent them from falling into the so-called middle-income trap. The danger of the program, in opinion of experts, is that China is not only becoming a high-tech economy, but, using protectionist methods and ignoring the fairness of competition in world markets, it is attempting to replace Western trans-national corporations (TNCs) in GVCs (Laskai, 2018).
It should also be noted that the MIC 2025 is a program that applies exclusively to the Chinese socio-political system and takes into account the mentality of the Chinese business community. The declaration of its goals and objectives, an indication of possible implementation tools is accompanied by real actions of the local party administrative apparatus, tight control and punishment for untimely execution.
A study of the peculiarities of the American approach to this topic showed that in the United States the main focus is on encouraging the acquisition of American products and increasing employment.
US President Trump's Buy American and Hire American Executive Order of April 18, 2017 was only a legacy of the 1933 Buy American Act and other acts passed thereafter. It contains requirements for the use of products predominantly manufactured within the country when making public procurement, restricting the access of foreign goods to the domestic market, assessing the impact of US free trade agreements with foreign countries and changing the rules for issuing work visas.
The analysis of this Executive Order showed toughening the requirements for public procurement, tightening control over spending of public funds, and increasing import duties on certain types of products. These results made it possible to enhance the consumption of goods produced in the United States, especially steel, iron, aluminum and cement. By revising free trade agreements with Canada, Mexico, and the Republic of Korea, the United States gained more favorable trading conditions for itself. As a result, it was then possible to improve trade surpluses with several other countries. By the summer of 2018, 3.7 million new jobs were created, and for the first 169 time in the 21st century, more job openings were available in America than the number of job seekers (Acosta, 2018).
The most significant negative consequences of the measures taken were the rise in prices of infrastructure projects; the emergence of difficulties in the sale of products of several industries, including the automotive one; decrease in the foreign direct investment (FDI) inflow; and the growing conflicts between the United States and its trading partners, primarily with China. With regard to the useful American experience in stimulating exports, it is advisable to note the establishment of digital attachés in the diplomatic missions of the United States abroad, which, in the context of the economy digitalization, contributes to the promotion of the export of American goods and services (Revenko & Revenko, 2019, p. 19).
The Make in India program, being a logical continuation of the country's large-scale economic liberalization in 1991-1992, has now acquired a more protectionist focus and aims to create a large domestic consumption market. One of its main tasks is to stimulate the foreign investment inflow in the Indian economy, in the interests of launching and expanding production, gaining access to advanced technologies and increasing export volume. India has also planned to increase the share of the manufacturing sector in the GDP from 15% to 25% by 2025 (Pakhomov, 2014). Practical steps to implement this program include the opening of many sectors of the economy to foreign investment, application of the Automatic route for investment in most of them (i.e., the non-resident of the national company does not require any approval from the government bodies), and simplification of procedures associated with company establishment and business transactions. Industrial clusters representing a modern infrastructure within five corridors are also being built. The abundance of cheap English-speaking workforce is a competitive advantage of India, which facilitates the interaction of Western employers with local employees. The factors hindering the successful implementation of the program include the lack of qualified personnel and electric power, the underdeveloped transport infrastructure, the complicated Indian legislation, the difficulties in interacting with government organizations, and periodic conflicts with trade unions.
For the period until 2030, one of the key tasks for India is to intensify activities to ensure the development of long-term planning, and against the background of protectionist support, automation, demographic changes in terms of increasing the number of young people, innovation, and a huge domestic market should become the growth drivers for the national economy. In the context of a sharp change in the business environment for India, it is most important to establish a balance between reality and formulated plans in terms of sustainable development of the country (Somvanshi, 2019).
As for Russia, the analysis of consumer preferences for a number of product groups in January-April 2019, which was carried out using the statistical method based on the data of the Federal State Statistics Service, showed that preferences are mainly given to Russian-made products (66%). Household goods and medical products of Russian manufacture are chosen by 47% of consumers, with 27% of consumers preferring Russian made shoes, 25% of consumers lean toward domestic clothes, 11.4% opt for domestic cars, and only 3.6% of respondents choose domestic high-tech products. As a result, it was concluded that the quality of the products, rather than the product country-of-origin effect, affects the preference of domestic or imported goods.
While choosing products of a foreign manufacturer, the lower price plays a role for the Russians; this choice is also determined by the traditional perception, rooted in Soviet reality, and implying that a foreign product is always more original, has higher quality and allows the owner to "stand out from the general group" of consumers.
Currently, respondents pay special attention to product safety. Food products are the leaders in the consumption of domestic goods. Out of 170 consumers who prefer foreign-made products, 90.9% choose it because of their higher quality, noting the innovativeness of the products, the best design and the use of new technologies in their production.
Assessment of the competitiveness of Russian goods and services in the domestic and foreign markets depending the use of the product country-of-origin effect, as exemplified by the chocolate market, enabled to conclude that the development/production of the goods and the headquarters of the company should be in the product country of origin. The price for products manufactured in Russia does not play a significant role, but this factor determines the consumer choice for foreign brands of chocolate (Dityashova, 2016).
To justify the need for protectionist measures, it is possible to use the method of expert assessments, since it is impossible to directly measure protectionism data. Therefore, the expert assessment of the results will be the most accurate method.
It seems rational to distinguish representatives of business structures and government agencies that cooperate on an ongoing basis and their area of activity is focused on achieving results related to the promotion of Russian products abroad. When choosing experts for the group, it was assumed that the expert should be authoritative in the issue at hand, and participate in the process being evaluated, or use its results. Top-level managers, their deputies, and head specialists meet these criteria. Mutual assessment of experts can be the basis for an objective selection of the most competent participants. The selection is a kind of sociometric survey, within the boundaries of which the most competent specialist is selected from the respondent's viewpoint. The participants are numbered from one onwards in Table 1. In total 26 persons make up 100%.

Source: the authors
As a result, to take decision on the particular criterion "The need to apply protectionist measures" in accordance with the method of mutual evaluation, it is proposed to select 12 people for the working group. The findings of the sociometric survey were entered into the table; The experts participating in the mutual assessment procedure are indicated by numbers 1-26. In this case, the number 1 in the table cell indicates the choice, "-" is a negative assessment or lack of choice.
To refine the estimates, the weight of each expert was determined. Twelve most competent experts were selected of the total number of candidates; the experts numbered 5, 1,23,13,7,18,4,9,11,24,14,12 were considered preferable. The expert can give personal self-assessment, which may also be a basis for the final selection of the expert.
Collective methods are also selected along with individual ones. Using the Delphi method is possible in situations where the generality is determined by the parameters of two typesconsistency between experts and accuracy.
The authors used an expert assessment in their study taking into account the coefficient of concordance, which is necessary to identify the level of agreement for some series of values of the pre-ranked variables. The main purpose of the assessment is to understand the possibility of the need for protectionist measures on specific grounds (from one or more), and the best option is selected for the set when comparing them. To obtain a qualitative result, the level of agreement in the assessing experts' work is first determined.

172
The assessment enabled to rank and determine the significance of the experts' properties.
Rank 1 corresponds to the most significant of the experts, rank n denotes the less important one; the rest are within 2 -(n -1).
The problem of allocating a candidate of the i-th place from two entails the assignment of rank (i + (i + 1)) / 2 = i + 0.5.
Non-randomness of the consent nature, and the consistency of expert opinions correspond to the coefficient of concordance (C).
Thus, the coefficient of concordance varies in the range from 0 to +1 (the case when all experts gave the same assessment for the properties).
Experts were interviewed in the form of questionnaires on the following issues: 1. Does the application of protectionist measures assist in promotion of domestic export-oriented products? 2. Are protectionist measures in demand in the domestic market? 3. Is there an alternative to protectionist measures? 4. Are there government programs aimed at protectionism? 5. Does the application of protectionist measures harm the country's politics, economy, social and ecological environment? 6. Are there any mechanisms for the application of protectionist measures that are different from those currently used? 7. Is it profitable to carry out reforms on the application of protectionist measures, or is it better to keep everything at the previous level? 8. Is it beneficial to take protectionist measures? 9. Is it beneficial to strengthen the role of protectionist measures?
After the interview, expert estimates were summarized using methods of mathematical statistics that allow for combination of these estimates into an integrated assessment of the need for protectionist measures. There is a sufficient number of expert assessment options.
After an expert assessment, the following aspects can be distinguished. The choice of the expert assessment method is justified, since the errors of economic measurements are diverse. The literature refers to more than 80 different types of measurement errors. In the physical measurement, random errors are most common; they may be eliminated by repeated measurements. However, the very possibility of repeated measurements is very problematic due to the irreproducibility of the measurement conditions, as well as an available negative reaction to repeated measurements by both objects and subjects of measurement, leading to the appearance of semantic and pragmatic errors.
By using the Ishikawa diagram, it becomes possible to graphically present the findings and determine the most significant cause-and-effect relationships between the factors and consequences in the problem being investigated. Such a diagram makes it possible to identify the key relationships between various factors and more accurately understand the process under study; it assists in revealing the main factors that have a significant impact on the development of the problem under consideration, and also helps build a graphical model for shaping a government-supported country brand program.

Results
The most significant results of the study include: -stances of the world's major economies regarding brand support programs have been analyzed; -the need for institutional transformation has been identifiedthe development of a comprehensive governmentsupported program to promote the national brand and domestic products in the foreign markets as the follow-up of the "Made in Russia" initiative; -based on the expert assessment, the use of government protectionist measures in conditions of external environment uncertainty when exporting products has been justified, subject to the compliance with the WTO rules; -a graphical model has been developed for shaping a government-supported country brand program to achieve leading positions in the international competition based on the approach of K. Ishikawa -"fishbone diagram" (Figure 1).

Discussion
The "Made in Russia" initiative is essentially an exclusive umbrella brand, which should ensure the entry of Russian manufacturers into foreign markets. However, it is impossible to achieve this large-scale promotion only by advertising.
In 2019, the Russian Export Center (REC) developed the Rules for the Operation of the Made in Russia Voluntary Certification System, regulating an independent and qualified assessment of the compliance of Russian products, works and services intended for export with the WTO rules.
In addition, the authors, analyzing, in particular, the practice of the USA and Canada in promoting goods to foreign markets, came to the conclusion that the "Made in Russia" brand, focused on compliance of products entering foreign markets with such characteristics as quality and reliability, accessibility and popularity, can be a competitive advantage provided that the implementation of the national image support policy is consistent.
The research results confirmed the hypothesis of the importance of developing a comprehensive governmentsupported country brand program. It was revealed that for systematic and coordinated state support of the umbrella national brandwith simultaneous support for regional/local brands to bring them to foreign markets, at this stage it seems inappropriate to transform the "Made in Russia" initiative into a comprehensive program without applying the protectionist policy.
This initiative should obtain formation and regulation mechanisms for all components of the reproductive chain of creation and implementation of a foreign trade product. The "Made in Russia" brand can be a competitive advantage if the government consistently implements a national image support policy by promoting and presenting the advantages of domestic products in foreign countries.
Current international economic relations adapt the actions of different states toward the deglobalization processes. The question arises of mutual understanding between the government and business in these conditions. The expert assessment carried out reflects the striving of business and the government for protectionist measures, which is explained by the desire to preserve the profitability of production. However, these measures can be considered forced when the enterprises themselves are unable to achieve environmental friendliness and quality in the production of products, which affects the country brand. Thus, the transition from the "Made in Russia" initiative to a full-fledged comprehensive country brand support program requires protectionist measures aimed at improving the environmental friendliness and quality of domestic products. At the same time, liberal values and compliance with international agreements within the WTO should continue to be a guideline.
The authors believe that further support of the export capacity of Russian industries and the introduction of producers on foreign markets requires orientation towards a liberalization policy. For these purposes, within the framework of the REC or under its auspices, including in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, it is advisable to establish specialized intermediary companiesforeign trade mediators operating under the terms of commission or commercial mandate agreements, for launching and promoting Russian products to foreign markets. The REC could also conduct quarterly analytical market studies being of potential interest to Russian producers, with the publication of brief recommendations on the website, and provide companies with analytical findings on commercial contractual terms. In addition, the network of REC offices should be expanded in the Russian regions, especially those with exportable industrial potential, including by direct contact with business entities and the organization of the educational process according to the rules, specifics and procedure for exporting products.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES
ISSN 2345-0282 (online) http://jssidoi.org/jesi/ 2020 Volume 8 Number 2 (December) http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2(10) To increase the exporters' responsibility regarding their use of an umbrella brand and the implementation of online sales, it is advisable to expand the list of platforms or channels supported by the RECs that ideally meet the needs of small companies seeking to use more than one distribution channel.

Conclusions
The development of civilized relationships that rely on the recognition of fair competition in the global economy, which forms the basis of countries' arrangements within the WTO, reinforces the need to develop comprehensive government-supported country brand programs. These programs make it possible to support companies in domestic markets using protectionist measures that meet the quality and environmental requirements to their products, which contributes to the cultivation of a country's positive image in the international arena.
An analysis of the positions of the world's major economies in relation to brand support programs revealed that the Chinese public enforcement tools for closing down (or moving outside the national territory) inefficient enterprises or those not meeting modernization goals, and lack of acknowledgement from party authorities of the emerging problems of unemployment and social insecurity in citizens, would hardly be applicable in Russia. However, the de-bureaucratization of the processes and terms of connecting newly created companies to electric power networks, orientation toward the use of broadband Internet in the operation of small and medium-sized businesses, and the provision of consulting services by specialized scientific and legal companies to increase labor productivity and export volumes may be relevant.
India's experience in changing the mechanism of VAT refund and hidden subsidy process is of some interest, in particular, the application of the Rebate of State Levies scheme, which involves a partial refund of the Goods and Service Tax (analogous to Russian VAT). The GST is paid by exporters and is not a subsidy.
In summary, it should be emphasized that all government-supported country brand programs are instruments of state regulation or direct management: they are prepared by governments, and the progress of their implementation is strictly controlled by state bodies. The government funds and local budgets are used to implement these programs. Agencies or export centers, export-import and development banks, and specially authorized government officials act as the main entities authorized by the governments of the countries within these programs. The specifics of the program implementation are determined by the socio-political and administrative arrangement of the country.
The researchers substantiated the use of governmental protectionist measures in conditions of environmental uncertainty when exporting products in compliance with the WTO rules. It has been proven that shaping a comprehensive government-supported country brand program requires protectionist measures that create manufacturing conditions for products that have the necessary quality and environmental friendliness in the context of uncertainty around exporting goods in order for that country to achieve a leading status in the global market.