Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-67-83
A. Zaostrovtsev, V. V. Matveev
The article presents the main characteristics of the modern Austrian school. Its fundamental principles are shown, from which its remaining gap with the economic mainstream becomes obvious. The task is solved to demonstrate that the Austrian economics as its initial methodological foundation has not strict methodological individualism, but institutional individualism. It is not typical for it to see a person as the notorious homo economicus. The Austrian school is a kind of modern institutionalism, the historical roots of which go back to the writings of its founders. This is due to its inherent focus not on the allocation of resources, but on individual exchange (catallaxy). The latter needs good institutions. At the same time, informal institutions (beliefs, traditions) that determine the meaning of human actions are highlighted. The spontaneous order and one of its institutional forms — anarchy are considered. The article concludes with an appeal to the perspectives of Austrian economic thought — its potential contribution to various research programs.
{"title":"Austrian school of economics: Fundamental principles, methodology, institutional analysis and perspectives","authors":"A. Zaostrovtsev, V. V. Matveev","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-67-83","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-67-83","url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the main characteristics of the modern Austrian school. Its fundamental principles are shown, from which its remaining gap with the economic mainstream becomes obvious. The task is solved to demonstrate that the Austrian economics as its initial methodological foundation has not strict methodological individualism, but institutional individualism. It is not typical for it to see a person as the notorious homo economicus. The Austrian school is a kind of modern institutionalism, the historical roots of which go back to the writings of its founders. This is due to its inherent focus not on the allocation of resources, but on individual exchange (catallaxy). The latter needs good institutions. At the same time, informal institutions (beliefs, traditions) that determine the meaning of human actions are highlighted. The spontaneous order and one of its institutional forms — anarchy are considered. The article concludes with an appeal to the perspectives of Austrian economic thought — its potential contribution to various research programs.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139861275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-103-124
G. Borshchevskiy
The purpose of the study is to assess the impact of preferential regimes on the socio-economic development of territories on the example of the Far Eastern regions. We use both quantitative (e.g. regression and correlation analysis, modeling, method of averages, index method, “difference in differences”, factor analysis) and qualitative methods (document analysis, case-study, benchmarking, classification). The creation of preferential regimes, such as the Territory of Advanced Development, Free Port of Vladivostok, Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation, was a key element of the Far East development policy. To manage these preferential regimes a development institution has been created named Corporation for the Far East and the Arctic Development (CFEAD). We carried out the evaluation of the indicators of preferential regimes functioning and the socio-economic development of the Far Eastern regions. We identified the regions where these regimes have a positive impact on economic growth, and estimated the degree of the CFEAD’s assistance to their success. Also we worked out recommendations for optimizing preferential regimes and development institutions activities, which are acceptable both for the regions of the Far Eastern Federal District and in the all-Russian context.
{"title":"Influence of preferential regimes on the Russian Far East development","authors":"G. Borshchevskiy","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-103-124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-103-124","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the study is to assess the impact of preferential regimes on the socio-economic development of territories on the example of the Far Eastern regions. We use both quantitative (e.g. regression and correlation analysis, modeling, method of averages, index method, “difference in differences”, factor analysis) and qualitative methods (document analysis, case-study, benchmarking, classification). The creation of preferential regimes, such as the Territory of Advanced Development, Free Port of Vladivostok, Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation, was a key element of the Far East development policy. To manage these preferential regimes a development institution has been created named Corporation for the Far East and the Arctic Development (CFEAD). We carried out the evaluation of the indicators of preferential regimes functioning and the socio-economic development of the Far Eastern regions. We identified the regions where these regimes have a positive impact on economic growth, and estimated the degree of the CFEAD’s assistance to their success. Also we worked out recommendations for optimizing preferential regimes and development institutions activities, which are acceptable both for the regions of the Far Eastern Federal District and in the all-Russian context.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139858353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-145-158
E. Zazdravnykh, T. I. Rodionova
This study aims to reveal how growth or decline in the rate of unemployment determines occupational injuries in Russia. Based on the regional statistics from 2009 to 2021 with the help of linear panel models we estimate the relationship between the rate of unemployment and fatal or non-fatal occupational injuries rates. The results show that when the economy is decreasing employees or employers prefer to underreport workplace accidents. This effect is especially strong in conditions of rising unemployment due to the release of workers, layoffs or liquidation of enterprises. At the same time, the fluctuations of unemployment do not change the fatal accidents; that is, injuries per se do not have a cyclical behavior. Thus, though there is a decreasing trend in the rate of occupational injuries in Russia, there is a problem of underreporting of accidents as we observe in high-income economies.
{"title":"The relationship between the rate on unemployment and occupational injuries: A case of Russia","authors":"E. Zazdravnykh, T. I. Rodionova","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-145-158","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-145-158","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to reveal how growth or decline in the rate of unemployment determines occupational injuries in Russia. Based on the regional statistics from 2009 to 2021 with the help of linear panel models we estimate the relationship between the rate of unemployment and fatal or non-fatal occupational injuries rates. The results show that when the economy is decreasing employees or employers prefer to underreport workplace accidents. This effect is especially strong in conditions of rising unemployment due to the release of workers, layoffs or liquidation of enterprises. At the same time, the fluctuations of unemployment do not change the fatal accidents; that is, injuries per se do not have a cyclical behavior. Thus, though there is a decreasing trend in the rate of occupational injuries in Russia, there is a problem of underreporting of accidents as we observe in high-income economies.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139858844","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-49-66
N. A. Makasheva
Nowadays, Leon Walras (1839—1910) is well-known first and foremost for his “Elements of pure political economy, or the theory of public wealth” (1874, 1877) and Mikhail Ivanovich Tugan-Baranovsky (1865—1919) gained a wide recognition due to his book “Industrial crises in contemporary England: Their causes and influences on the life of the people” (1894), which had a significant impact on the development of economics. At the same time, both economists were deeply concerned not only with theoretical problems, but also with those that are now considered beyond the scope of theory, the problem of social ideal and that of a more just social system being among them. Walras and Tugan-Baranovsky associated the embodiment of the social ideal with socialism and strived for an economic system that corresponded to that ideal, albeit their conceptions of socialism being different. The principal opportunity to achieve reconciliation between science and ideal was associated with a synthetic approach reconciling the scientific method and ideal, economics being considered “a bridge” between them, or a «testing ground», where the reconciliation was to take place. Although history has shown that Walras’s and Tugan-Baranovsky’s ideas of socialism were utopian, the very fact that two eminent economists were deeply concerned with the problem of social ideal and socialism at a time when the foundations of modern economics were being laid, shows that the striving of economists to create objective and rigorous science was, to a measure, driven by their aspiration to solve the social problem and to set up a social and economic system which is rational and more just than the existing one
{"title":"Walras and Tugan-Baranovsky on socialism: Reconciling economic science and social ideal","authors":"N. A. Makasheva","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-49-66","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-49-66","url":null,"abstract":"Nowadays, Leon Walras (1839—1910) is well-known first and foremost for his “Elements of pure political economy, or the theory of public wealth” (1874, 1877) and Mikhail Ivanovich Tugan-Baranovsky (1865—1919) gained a wide recognition due to his book “Industrial crises in contemporary England: Their causes and influences on the life of the people” (1894), which had a significant impact on the development of economics. At the same time, both economists were deeply concerned not only with theoretical problems, but also with those that are now considered beyond the scope of theory, the problem of social ideal and that of a more just social system being among them. Walras and Tugan-Baranovsky associated the embodiment of the social ideal with socialism and strived for an economic system that corresponded to that ideal, albeit their conceptions of socialism being different. The principal opportunity to achieve reconciliation between science and ideal was associated with a synthetic approach reconciling the scientific method and ideal, economics being considered “a bridge” between them, or a «testing ground», where the reconciliation was to take place. Although history has shown that Walras’s and Tugan-Baranovsky’s ideas of socialism were utopian, the very fact that two eminent economists were deeply concerned with the problem of social ideal and socialism at a time when the foundations of modern economics were being laid, shows that the striving of economists to create objective and rigorous science was, to a measure, driven by their aspiration to solve the social problem and to set up a social and economic system which is rational and more just than the existing one","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139801455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-125-144
E. N. Bykova
The subject of the study is the system of land relations in Russia, the imperfection of which gives rise to negative infrastructural externalities caused by the modernization and development of linear engineering infrastructure The objective of the work is to develop methods for state regulation of the external effects, the main one of which is internalization through land taxation. In the work the concept of “negative infrastructure-related externalities”, their structure and economic nature in land relations are introduced. Also the consequences of negative infrastructure-related externalities on the economic interests of owners of encumbered land plots are determined. To overcome those issues the economic mechanism for regulating the use of land resources and their redistribution is developed. The scope of application of research results covers a lot of long-term aims: from the differentiation of land taxation for the internalization of negative infrastructure-related externalities to territorial planning at all levels.
{"title":"State regulation of negative infrastructure-related externalities in the system of land relations","authors":"E. N. Bykova","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-125-144","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-125-144","url":null,"abstract":"The subject of the study is the system of land relations in Russia, the imperfection of which gives rise to negative infrastructural externalities caused by the modernization and development of linear engineering infrastructure The objective of the work is to develop methods for state regulation of the external effects, the main one of which is internalization through land taxation. In the work the concept of “negative infrastructure-related externalities”, their structure and economic nature in land relations are introduced. Also the consequences of negative infrastructure-related externalities on the economic interests of owners of encumbered land plots are determined. To overcome those issues the economic mechanism for regulating the use of land resources and their redistribution is developed. The scope of application of research results covers a lot of long-term aims: from the differentiation of land taxation for the internalization of negative infrastructure-related externalities to territorial planning at all levels.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139798968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-5-22
A. L. Vedev, V. A. Eremkin, K. A. Tuzov
This paper examines prospects for the Russian economy in the mid-term until 2026. The authors identify four key factors that determine future dynamics: sanctions, the state of foreign trade, relations between Russian and foreign businesses, policy of the government and the Bank of Russia. The basic scenario of our forecast is based on the most probable future trends in development of foreign trade, investment activity, industrial dynamics, changes in exchange rate of the national currency, inflationary picture and monetary policy. The conservative scenario takes into account the manifestation of some negative risks, probability of which the authors consider as quite high. For both scenarios, the authors offer a list of risks that can have a significant impact on the forecast values. Results of modeling economic dynamics indicate that in the medium-term Russia will face moderate recovery growth, and there will be no real opportunities to accelerate it. By the end of 2026, the Russian economy will increase in the range of 5.6—7.8% compared to the level of 2021. The results of the presented work can be used for a critical comparison with official forecasts of the Bank of Russia and the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation in order to improve the efficiency of budget planning for future periods.
{"title":"High risks and weak pace of economic growth: Russia macroeconomic forecast for the medium term","authors":"A. L. Vedev, V. A. Eremkin, K. A. Tuzov","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-5-22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-5-22","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines prospects for the Russian economy in the mid-term until 2026. The authors identify four key factors that determine future dynamics: sanctions, the state of foreign trade, relations between Russian and foreign businesses, policy of the government and the Bank of Russia. The basic scenario of our forecast is based on the most probable future trends in development of foreign trade, investment activity, industrial dynamics, changes in exchange rate of the national currency, inflationary picture and monetary policy. The conservative scenario takes into account the manifestation of some negative risks, probability of which the authors consider as quite high. For both scenarios, the authors offer a list of risks that can have a significant impact on the forecast values. Results of modeling economic dynamics indicate that in the medium-term Russia will face moderate recovery growth, and there will be no real opportunities to accelerate it. By the end of 2026, the Russian economy will increase in the range of 5.6—7.8% compared to the level of 2021. The results of the presented work can be used for a critical comparison with official forecasts of the Bank of Russia and the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation in order to improve the efficiency of budget planning for future periods.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139798924","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-23-48
S. V. Smirnov, N. V. Kondrashov, A. S. Kachur
The specificity of macroeconomic forecasts is determined not so much by the list of predicted indicators or by mathematical tools used, but by the unavoidable human factor, which often generates great difference between forecasts made by various professionals. In Russian-language literature, this psychological aspect of macroeconomic forecasting has not received any attention; our work is designed to fill this gap. As a source of statistical data we used the forecasts extracted from the quarterly Poll of Professional Forecasters (PPF), which began in the first quarter of 2000. An analysis of real GDP and CPI forecasts made it possible to identify optimists and pessimists among independent experts, and also to show that the official forecasts by the Russian Ministry of Economic Development and the Bank of Russia are often too optimistic (with the possible exception of forecasts for a current year). It was also confirmed that the accuracy of consensus-forecasts exceeds (in the long run) not only that of official forecasts, but also forecasts made by the vast majority of independent experts. This asserts consensus-forecasts as a benchmark against which macroeconomic forecasts of other experts and organizations should be compared. An analysis of errors for different forecast horizons showed that in the medium term, the most significant ones are associated with underestimation of the resilience of the Russian economy to external shocks. This aspect of macroeconomic forecasting is closely related to forecasting cyclical dynamics (in particular, recessions, their beginning, depth and duration). Currently, this is just what requires additional attention by macroeconomic forecasters.
宏观经济预测的特殊性与其说是由预测指标清单或所使用的数学工具决定的，不如说是由不可避免的人为因素决定的。在俄语文献中，宏观经济预测的心理因素尚未得到关注；我们的工作旨在填补这一空白。作为统计数据来源，我们使用了从专业预测人员季度民意调查（PPF）中提取的预测数据，该调查始于 2000 年第一季度。通过对实际 GDP 和 CPI 预测的分析，我们发现了独立专家中的乐观主义者和悲观主义者，同时也表明俄罗斯经济发展部和俄罗斯银行的官方预测往往过于乐观（对当年的预测可能例外）。研究还证实，共识预测的准确性（从长远来看）不仅超过了官方预测，也超过了绝大多数独立专家的预测。这就证明了共识预测是一个基准，其他专家和组织的宏观经济预测应与之进行比较。对不同预测期误差的分析表明，从中期来看，最大的误差与低估俄罗斯经济对外部冲击的承受力有关。宏观经济预测的这一方面与周期性动态预测（特别是衰退、衰退的开始、深度和持续时间）密切相关。目前，这正是宏观经济预测人员需要额外关注的问题。
{"title":"Macroeconomic forecasting and macroeconomic forecasts","authors":"S. V. Smirnov, N. V. Kondrashov, A. S. Kachur","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-23-48","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-23-48","url":null,"abstract":"The specificity of macroeconomic forecasts is determined not so much by the list of predicted indicators or by mathematical tools used, but by the unavoidable human factor, which often generates great difference between forecasts made by various professionals. In Russian-language literature, this psychological aspect of macroeconomic forecasting has not received any attention; our work is designed to fill this gap. As a source of statistical data we used the forecasts extracted from the quarterly Poll of Professional Forecasters (PPF), which began in the first quarter of 2000. An analysis of real GDP and CPI forecasts made it possible to identify optimists and pessimists among independent experts, and also to show that the official forecasts by the Russian Ministry of Economic Development and the Bank of Russia are often too optimistic (with the possible exception of forecasts for a current year). It was also confirmed that the accuracy of consensus-forecasts exceeds (in the long run) not only that of official forecasts, but also forecasts made by the vast majority of independent experts. This asserts consensus-forecasts as a benchmark against which macroeconomic forecasts of other experts and organizations should be compared. An analysis of errors for different forecast horizons showed that in the medium term, the most significant ones are associated with underestimation of the resilience of the Russian economy to external shocks. This aspect of macroeconomic forecasting is closely related to forecasting cyclical dynamics (in particular, recessions, their beginning, depth and duration). Currently, this is just what requires additional attention by macroeconomic forecasters.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139798542","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-84-102
U. A. Parkhimenka
The article analyzes the situation, conventionally called the "Second Leontief Paradox", when a recognized scientist, Nobel laureate and undisputed authority in the academic environment, it turns out, has practically no place in modern economic theory - neither within the "mainstream" nor in unorthodox directions. This paradox is considered in the context of four questions: (1) does Leontief have a “theory” at all; (2) to which theoretical school Leontief belongs or at least gravitates; (3) what is the main factor in the formation of the paradox under consideration; (4) what are the prospects for Leontief's approach in macroeconomics. To understand this paradox, it is proposed to use the terms introduced by G. Mankiw - an economist as a scientist and an economist as an engineer. It is concluded that there is still a gap between "theory" and "engineering" in economics. It is assumed that such a gap, including in connection with the rapid growth of a large amount of economic data and universal digitalization, may gradually decrease.
{"title":"The Second Leontief Paradox: Economic Theory or Economic Engineering?","authors":"U. A. Parkhimenka","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-84-102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-84-102","url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes the situation, conventionally called the \"Second Leontief Paradox\", when a recognized scientist, Nobel laureate and undisputed authority in the academic environment, it turns out, has practically no place in modern economic theory - neither within the \"mainstream\" nor in unorthodox directions. This paradox is considered in the context of four questions: (1) does Leontief have a “theory” at all; (2) to which theoretical school Leontief belongs or at least gravitates; (3) what is the main factor in the formation of the paradox under consideration; (4) what are the prospects for Leontief's approach in macroeconomics. To understand this paradox, it is proposed to use the terms introduced by G. Mankiw - an economist as a scientist and an economist as an engineer. It is concluded that there is still a gap between \"theory\" and \"engineering\" in economics. It is assumed that such a gap, including in connection with the rapid growth of a large amount of economic data and universal digitalization, may gradually decrease.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139798584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-06DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-84-102
U. A. Parkhimenka
The article analyzes the situation, conventionally called the "Second Leontief Paradox", when a recognized scientist, Nobel laureate and undisputed authority in the academic environment, it turns out, has practically no place in modern economic theory - neither within the "mainstream" nor in unorthodox directions. This paradox is considered in the context of four questions: (1) does Leontief have a “theory” at all; (2) to which theoretical school Leontief belongs or at least gravitates; (3) what is the main factor in the formation of the paradox under consideration; (4) what are the prospects for Leontief's approach in macroeconomics. To understand this paradox, it is proposed to use the terms introduced by G. Mankiw - an economist as a scientist and an economist as an engineer. It is concluded that there is still a gap between "theory" and "engineering" in economics. It is assumed that such a gap, including in connection with the rapid growth of a large amount of economic data and universal digitalization, may gradually decrease.
{"title":"The Second Leontief Paradox: Economic Theory or Economic Engineering?","authors":"U. A. Parkhimenka","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-84-102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-2-84-102","url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes the situation, conventionally called the \"Second Leontief Paradox\", when a recognized scientist, Nobel laureate and undisputed authority in the academic environment, it turns out, has practically no place in modern economic theory - neither within the \"mainstream\" nor in unorthodox directions. This paradox is considered in the context of four questions: (1) does Leontief have a “theory” at all; (2) to which theoretical school Leontief belongs or at least gravitates; (3) what is the main factor in the formation of the paradox under consideration; (4) what are the prospects for Leontief's approach in macroeconomics. To understand this paradox, it is proposed to use the terms introduced by G. Mankiw - an economist as a scientist and an economist as an engineer. It is concluded that there is still a gap between \"theory\" and \"engineering\" in economics. It is assumed that such a gap, including in connection with the rapid growth of a large amount of economic data and universal digitalization, may gradually decrease.","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139858346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-07DOI: 10.32609/0042-8736-2024-1-115-136
V. Maltsev, A. Yudanov
The article is devoted to the development of the knowledge-based approach to the theory of the firm (KBV). It is noted that the modern mainstream KBV (R. Grant (1996) and numerous followers) sees the nature of the firm in effective integration of the knowledge of specialists employed in it. The article proposes to supplement this analysis with the second important function of the firm — its role as an encapsulator of knowledge. The foundations of such an approach to knowledge were laid by H. Demsetz, but have not yet been developed in the literature. The essence of encapsulation is to reduce complete knowledge to an algorithm of actions sufficient to achieve the goal, which is possible, say, with the help of instructions, directions of the manager, built in constructive “foolproofing”, etc. The compiler of the instruction does not integrate his knowledge with the knowledge of its performer, but prescribes the unquestioned implementation of the algorithm of behaviour. Thus, huge cost savings are achieved on the training of performers. The article considers the limiting case — the scheme of the firm functioning as a pure encapsulator of knowledge, the Markov property of the process is substantiated. The role of the entrepreneur as an architect and manager of the knowledge encapsulation scheme is revealed. At the same time, significant negative aspects of production based on the widespread use of encapsulated (incomplete — you do what you do not understand) knowledge are analyzed. In particular, the non-creative nature of labour in the encapsulationbased firm (a particular manifestation of which is the slow spread of horizontally organized or teal firms) and the threat of disqualification of performers when combining encapsulation with artificial intelligence are discussed
这篇文章专门论述了以知识为基础的企业理论（KBV）方法的发展。文章指出，现代主流知识型企业理论（R. Grant (1996) 及其众多追随者）认为，企业的本质在于有效整合企业中雇用的专家的知识。本文建议用企业的第二个重要功能--作为知识的封装者--来补充这一分析。德姆塞茨（H. Demsetz）为这种知识方法奠定了基础，但尚未在文献中得到发展。封装的本质是将完整的知识还原为足以实现目标的行动算法，例如，借助指令、管理者的指示、内置的建设性 "傻瓜化 "等来实现。指令的编制者并不将自己的知识与执行者的知识结合起来，而是规定毫无疑问地执行行为算法。因此，在培训表演者方面节省了大量成本。文章考虑了极限情况--公司作为知识的纯粹封装者的计划，证实了该过程的马尔可夫特性。文章揭示了企业家作为知识封装计划的设计者和管理者的作用。同时，还分析了在广泛使用封装知识（不完整--你做你不了解的事）的基础上进行生产的重大负面影响。特别是，讨论了在基于封装的公司中劳动的非创造性（其具体表现是横向组织或茶色公司的传播缓慢），以及在将封装与人工智能相结合时，执行者被取消资格的威胁。
{"title":"Knowledge-based view of the firm and the phenomenon of knowledge encapsulation","authors":"V. Maltsev, A. Yudanov","doi":"10.32609/0042-8736-2024-1-115-136","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-1-115-136","url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the development of the knowledge-based approach to the theory of the firm (KBV). It is noted that the modern mainstream KBV (R. Grant (1996) and numerous followers) sees the nature of the firm in effective integration of the knowledge of specialists employed in it. The article proposes to supplement this analysis with the second important function of the firm — its role as an encapsulator of knowledge. The foundations of such an approach to knowledge were laid by H. Demsetz, but have not yet been developed in the literature. The essence of encapsulation is to reduce complete knowledge to an algorithm of actions sufficient to achieve the goal, which is possible, say, with the help of instructions, directions of the manager, built in constructive “foolproofing”, etc. The compiler of the instruction does not integrate his knowledge with the knowledge of its performer, but prescribes the unquestioned implementation of the algorithm of behaviour. Thus, huge cost savings are achieved on the training of performers. The article considers the limiting case — the scheme of the firm functioning as a pure encapsulator of knowledge, the Markov property of the process is substantiated. The role of the entrepreneur as an architect and manager of the knowledge encapsulation scheme is revealed. At the same time, significant negative aspects of production based on the widespread use of encapsulated (incomplete — you do what you do not understand) knowledge are analyzed. In particular, the non-creative nature of labour in the encapsulationbased firm (a particular manifestation of which is the slow spread of horizontally organized or teal firms) and the threat of disqualification of performers when combining encapsulation with artificial intelligence are discussed","PeriodicalId":45534,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Ekonomiki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2024-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139448521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：