recipient municipalities varies from year to year depending<sup>on the mineclosureprogram, where</sup> new mine closure takes place, etc.).

126. Of note is the extremely small volume of financing<sup>that municipalitieshaveallocated to</sup> professional re-training programs. While these are a common<sup>policyprescriptionincasesof</sup> large-scale industrial downsizing, the actual experience on<sup>thegroundinRussiaindicatesthat</sup> this policy tool has not been used. The interviews conducted with local experts and with recipients of the training indicate that the major problem<sup>withprofessionalre-training,even</sup> when the training is of a high quality, is the lack of relevance of<sup>the professionsin whichtraining</sup> is provided to the needs of the local job market.. This experience<sup>isconsistentwiththat of other</sup> countries. Another view encountered in some of the interviews<sup>is the morecomplex questionof</sup> demand for such services among laid-off miners. One<sup>frequentlyencounteredpointof viewis</sup> that the miner's mentality is such that he is not inclined to<sup>seekemployment in other professions,</sup> and hence not interested in retraining. A more prosaic<sup>explanationin the case of Russia couldbe</sup> that in recent years, jobs have again become available<sup>inthecoalindustryinsome regions,and</sup> miners reasonably prefer to seek employment in the profession<sup>they knowbest andin which they</sup> can make relatively better wages. A comparative study of<sup>social assessmentscarriedout in1996</sup> and 2000 found that in 2000, interest among miners who had<sup>beenlaid-offinconnectionwith</sup> mine closure in seeking re-employment in the industry had increased,<sup>whileinterest inre-training</sup> had decreased relative to the 1996 survey.<sup>28</sup> 127. The small business support category (which may be used<sup>forprovisionof microcredits</sup> and to establish a support infrastructure) has received<sup>arelativelysmallshareof eachyear's</sup> allocation, but in absolute terms increased appreciably<sup>from the firstyear tosubsequentyears.</sup> Box I recounts the interesting experience of the city of<sup>Novoshakhtinskinrelationtothesmall</sup> business support category of LDP.

128. One of the more hotly debated issues in the administration of<sup>theLDP has beenthe</sup> question of whether former miners and non-miners alike,<sup>oronlyformerminers,werethe</sup> intended beneficiaries of these funds (either as workers in temporary<sup>publicwork programs, or as</sup> entrepreneurs competing for investment funds, or as employees<sup>inenterprisescreating jobs with</sup> the help of the subsidies.) In fact, from the start, the philosophy<sup>of theLDP as formulatedon the</sup> national level and as supported by the World Bank<sup>has beento ensure maximumaccesstoLDP</sup> funds to benefit the entire community. The rationale for<sup>this position wastherecognitionthat</sup> mine closure has an impact on the entire community and<sup>alsothat theentirecommunitybenefits</sup> from successful efforts to create new jobs and to diversify<sup>the local economy.</sup> In practice, however, different municipalities have employed various interpretations,<sup>with some insisting that</sup> the LDP funds are "money for the coal miners" and<sup>shouldbe usedtoalleviatethesituationof</sup> miners and their families. Most municipalities; however,<sup>have followeda moreinclusivepolicy</sup> that is closer to the intention of the programs.

> **28** Coming (2001).

36