
<rss version="0.91">
    <channel>
        <title>Latest Articles from Russian Journal of Economics</title>
        <description>Latest 16 Articles from Russian Journal of Economics</description>
        <link>https://rujec.org/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2026 05:09:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Pensoft FeedCreator</generator>
        
	
		<item>
		    <title>Army, tax reforms, and well-being in eighteenth-century Russia</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/165831/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 12(1): 137-152</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.12.165831</p>
					<p>Authors: Arthur R. Mustafin</p>
					<p>Abstract: This article examines archival records on crop yields and recruit numbers in eighteenth-century Russia, analyzing their dynamics and comparing them with data on recruits’ height as an indicator of changes in the standard of living. The study uses more than one hundred and ten archival sources, enabling the construction of time series. The resulting numbers confirm that the standard of living in Russia was generally low and changed in a cyclical pattern. The study reveals how military and tax reforms emerged as a significant driver of these economic fluctuations. The dataset compiled by the author not only facilitates estimations of living standards during this period but also enables researchers to address various questions in Russian social and economic history.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/165831/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/165831/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/165831/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:00:07 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>The impetus for economic reform and the creation of an international comparisons system in Comecon (1962–1969)</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/171619/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 12(1): 121-136</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.12.171619</p>
					<p>Authors: Aleksei A. Popov</p>
					<p>Abstract: This paper examines the impact of economic reforms in the USSR and the Comecon countries, in particular the Kosygin reform (1965), on the development of a system of international economic comparisons in 1962–1969. Using previously unpublished archival materials from Comecon and Soviet statistical agencies, the author shows that reform initiatives stimulated methodological innovations, such as purchasing power parity (PPP) comparisons. However, institutional conflicts, ideological constraints, and technological limitations hindered the system’s integration into global practice, notably the UN International Comparison Program (ICP). The article argues that, despite partial successes, the stagnation of the project after 1969 reflected deeper systemic deficiencies within planned economies, including bureaucratic inertia and unresolved competition among research centers.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/171619/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/171619/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/171619/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:00:06 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Three attempts at market reform of the Soviet economy: A comparative analysis</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/173518/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 12(1): 60-94</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.12.173518</p>
					<p>Authors: Ivan M. Baydakov, Vladimir A. Mau</p>
					<p>Abstract: This article presents a comparative overview of the three main attempts to introduce market approaches into the economy of the Soviet Union during its seventy-year history: the New Economic Policy (NEP) of 1921–1928, the Kosygin reform of 1965, and perestroika from 1985 to 1991. The research aims to analyze and compare the nature, political conditions, institutional challenges, and ultimate consequences of these three initiatives, which sought to improve the Soviet system through incremental market integration without changing the core political power structure. Each of the three reform efforts initially triggered a period of accelerated growth, outperforming previous economic trends. However, these successes were short-lived, and all reforms were quickly rolled back. The study’s main finding indicates a fundamental structural incompatibility between market mechanisms and the Soviet political order. This contradiction, rooted in the communist idea, meant that when central control weakened, immediate interests (wages, consumption) outweighed long-term interests (investment). The reforms also differed significantly in their approach to private property: the NEP allowed it as a “temporary retreat,” the Kosygin reform strictly prohibited it, and perestroika gradually permitted private enterprise, eventually evolving into a “real revolution.” In the end, all three attempts failed to create a stable, durable system. The Soviet experience clearly demonstrates that, within its specific historical context, it was impossible to combine Soviet political power with market efficiency. The political core consistently rejected the necessary deep changes, leading to the strategic failure of all liberalization efforts.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/173518/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/173518/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/173518/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Thirty years of economic transition in the former Soviet Union: Microeconomic and institutional dimensions</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/104761/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 9(1): 1-32</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.9.104761</p>
					<p>Authors: Marek Dabrowski</p>
					<p>Abstract: The post-communist transition in the former Soviet Union (FSU) cannot be considered entirely successful, especially in the political and institutional spheres. Nevertheless, in the economic sphere, the transition process succeeded in rebuilding the foundations of market economies based on private ownership by the early 2000s, even if the adopted­ policies and institutions have proved suboptimal and distortive in many countries. The transition experience in the FSU region has demonstrated a correlation between political and economic reforms, with a strong impact of the former on the latter. The deficit of democracy, civil freedoms and the rule of law has negatively impacted the course of the economic transition, causing significant delay, distortions and partial reversals.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/104761/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/104761/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/104761/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2023 18:59:46 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Unexploded ordnance contamination and household livelihood choice in rural Vietnam</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/79738/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 8(3): 276-294</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.8.79738</p>
					<p>Authors: Thuy Ngoc Nguyen, Tuyen Quang Tran, Huong Van Vu</p>
					<p>Abstract: Vietnam is a country that found itself at the center of the Indochina wars and was subjected to the most intense aerial bombing in history. However, little research has been done on the effect of unexploded ordnance (UXO) contamination on household livelihoods in rural Vietnam. In this paper, we investigate the contaminating effect of unexploded ordnance on households. Livelihood choices are classified by cluster analysis techniques, and unexploded ordnance contamination is measured at the district level by the proportion of land at risk from unexploded bombs and mines. We examine the effect of UXO contamination on livelihood choices using a multinomial logit model, controlling for various important household and regional level characteristics. It was found that households in districts with greater contamination were less likely to adopt a formal wage-earning livelihood, characterized by higher income and less poverty, than they were to engage in an agricultural livelihood. This suggests that the Indochina wars have had a long-running effect, reducing the likelihood of non-farm diversification, which in turn diminishes economic well-being among rural households in Vietnam.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/79738/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/79738/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/79738/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Thu, 6 Oct 2022 20:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Labor market regulation in Eastern Russia in 1918–1922: Institutional factors, mechanisms, and outcomes</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/56634/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 7(2): 137-159</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.7.56634</p>
					<p>Authors: Vadim M. Rynkov</p>
					<p>Abstract: This article uses archival documents and periodical publications to analyze the impact of the Civil War on the labor market in the regions of Eastern Russia. It considers key labor market institutions such as legislation, infrastructure (labor exchanges, unemployment funds, and professional and entrepreneurship organizations), and labor contracts. It has been established that there was continuity in the regulatory framework and labor market management tools between the Provisional Government and the anti-Bolshevik governments. The study shows the challenges and shortcomings of managing hiring and dismissal processes by soft regulatory methods given the deep economic crisis. The labor supply was backed by extensive cohorts of prisoners of war, refugees, and foreign workers, which contributed to a drop in labor rates. The government sought to stabilize the situation by reinforcing transactional barriers to reduce employment. The labor market in Eastern Russia was subjected to regionalization and localization.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56634/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56634/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56634/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 9 Jul 2021 18:46:31 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Harvest, railway transportation and banking services to the agriculture in the Central Black Earth Region of the Russian Empire in the late 19 th century</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/51709/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 7(2): 119-136</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.7.51709</p>
					<p>Authors: Sofya A. Salomatina, Vladislav Y. Ivakin</p>
					<p>Abstract: This paper studies the influence of the service sector (joint-stock commercial banks and railways) on the economic development of agricultural regions within the Russian empire in the second half of the 19th century, using the case of the Central Black Earth region. The study compares yield data for major crops, railroad transportation of grain and flour, and the banking services to agriculture producers and traders. Statistical analysis of this data disproves the prevailing historical economic viewpoint which claims that agricultural exports were not accompanied by bank support, because it did not take into account a rather high level of infrastructure around the Riga–Oryol railway trunk, which was formed back in the 1870s. The exports in this region consisted of the prior year’s harvest, which indicated a rather developed system of crop storage and accompanying banking services. The study reveals a dramatic growth in the services sector throughout the Central Black Earth region during the 1890s. In previous decades, this system could not be extended to the entire region due to a long history of unfavorable conditions in the agricultural and banking sectors. Thus, banking services in Russia at the end of the 19th century were provided to not just industrial and stock markets customers. In those regions dominated by agriculture, services infrastructure had been oriented towards this sector.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/51709/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/51709/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/51709/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 9 Jul 2021 18:16:58 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Land prices and railroad building in European Russia, 1860s to the early 1900s</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/56600/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 7(2): 93-104</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.7.56600</p>
					<p>Authors: Carol S. Leonard, Zafar Nazarov, Leonid I. Borodkin, Maria A. Karpenko, Roman B. Konchakov</p>
					<p>Abstract: This paper shows that railroad building in Russia, as in Europe and the US in the nineteenth century, improved the value of land, a classic benefit of transportation investment in largely agrarian countries. From a database constructed for this paper, we use cross-sectional data for the fifty European Russian regions to show the association of the length of the railroad (measured in 1894), land prices (measured in 1900) and annual growth of land prices (in rubles) for 1885–1910.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56600/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56600/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56600/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 9 Jul 2021 15:58:16 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Denmark and Russia: What can we learn from the historical comparison of two great Arctic agricultural empires?</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/49151/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 7(2): 105-118</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.7.49151</p>
					<p>Authors: Elena S. Korchmina, Paul Sharp</p>
					<p>Abstract: We propose that the “historically relevant” comparison of the Danish and Russian Empires from the early eighteenth century until the First World War presents a useful starting point for a promising research agenda. We justify the comparison by noting that the two empires enjoyed striking geographical, political and institutional similarities. Beyond this, we also demonstrate that the two empires were bound together by war, royal marriage, and migration. We suggest some examples of what might be investigated, with a particular focus on agriculture, due to its importance to both Danish and Russian economic history. Finally, we zoom in on the role Danish experts played for developing the Russian butter industry.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/49151/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/49151/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/49151/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 9 Jul 2021 14:33:13 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Foreign concessions in the USSR textile industry in the 1920s and early 1930s: The public-private partnership experience</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/51697/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 7(2): 160-184</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.7.51697</p>
					<p>Authors: Irina V. Shilnikova</p>
					<p>Abstract: Despite the Soviet government’s declarative efforts to engage foreign capital in rebuilding the economy during the 1920s, most concessions did not last long and were liquidated before the respective contracts expired. This article considers the conditions and key outcomes of concession enterprises, as well as the reasons and mechanisms for their premature liquidation, using the textile industry as an example. The main focus is on the indicators and reasons for the high profitability of these enterprises, lending issues and Soviet methods for limiting the growth of foreign concession operator profits.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/51697/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/51697/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/51697/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 9 Jul 2021 05:12:16 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Priorities and challenges of the EU energy transition: From the European Green Package to the new Green Deal</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/55375/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 6(4): 374-389</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.6.55375</p>
					<p>Authors: Manfred Hafner, Pier Paolo Raimondi</p>
					<p>Abstract: As decarbonization and climate policy are gaining relevance in the European Union (EU) energy policy, the present paper seeks to present both priorities and challenges for of the EU energy transition. As priorities, we outline the key targets and initiatives proposed and set by the European institutions in relation to the energy matters. The EU identifies renewable energy sources, energy efficiency and reduction of the greenhouse gas (GHG) as the three pillars to achieve its carbon neutrality. The final goal for to the EU energy and climate targets is to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. Nevertheless, since given energy policy is being a “shared competence” between the EU institutions and Member States, each Member State plays a critical role for the achievement of the EU energy transition. Different socioeconomic structures and the energy mix across Europe have caused the implementation process of each EU target to develop at a different pace among European countries. We illustrate this drawing on four countries: Italy, the UK, Germany and Poland. We assess their political commitment to the energy transition and their actions regarding energy transformation. These four countries are only an example of the different pace in the implementation of the EU energy and climate targets. The last part of the paper is devoted to the ambitious plan, called Green New Deal, launched by the present Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen. It sets key priorities, reaffirming European commitments to the energy and climate transition. However, the plan faces significant obstacles. For example, division among Member States (North-South and West-East) might be a factor that could undermine the achievement of the European energy transition, due to multiple and divergent interests (also on the future role of the energy transition in the aftermath of COVID-19 and the resulting economic crisis). Another challenge is constituted by popular opposition, especially from those people that see the energy transition — and consequent economic and industrial transformation — as a potential threat to their well-being and jobs, as the French gilets jaunes show. Lastly, we explain that the European energy transition will impact also its external relations, for example with Russia, proposing how the two blocs can preserve their energy relationship in light of the energy transition, notably through the conversion of natural gas to hydrogen and storing/using the resulting CO2.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/55375/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/55375/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/55375/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2020 03:11:33 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Twenty years of the G20: Has it changed global economic governance?</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/49435/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 5(4): 412-440</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.5.49435</p>
					<p>Authors: Suman Bery, Filippo Biondi, Sybrand Brekelmans</p>
					<p>Abstract: The G20 has become the preeminent forum for international economic coordination. Twenty years after its creation, the paper reviews its performance with respect to the coordination of macroeconomic policies. The retrospective assessment focuses on two main questions: (i) Have the G20 summits succeeded in promoting macroeconomic policies with positive cross-border consequences, while preventing the opposite? (ii) To what extent has expanding the G7 to a diverse group of emerging and developing economies significantly changed the discourse and affected substantive outcomes? We argue that the G20 played a key role during the crisis of 2008, but policy coordination has been problematic since. Our review suggests that the G20 Presidencies of the emerging economies have made considerable efforts to shape the agenda toward issues of their interest, but have not always prevailed, notably on issues of global financial governance.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/49435/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/49435/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/49435/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2019 11:00:06 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Sociology of individual tragedies. Homicides and suicides: Cross-country cluster analysis</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/47348/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 5(3): 251-276</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.5.47348</p>
					<p>Authors: Leonid M. Grigoryev, Lyubov Popovets</p>
					<p>Abstract: Sociology and psychology closely study the phenomena of homicide and suicide among countries of the world, but both remain little studied in the context of the levels of countries’ development and international comparisons. Developed countries (in terms of GDP per capita) show a decrease in the relative rate of homicides, but the case of suicides is not so explicit. This paper examines the relative levels of suicides and homicides all around the world in the context of socio-economic indices as well as indicators of mental health among the population. Addressing the example of the BRICS countries, the authors discuss the impact of economic imbalances on homicide and suicide levels. The analysis demonstrates that social inequality determines cross-country differences for relative levels in terms of homicide rates, including the course of events in the post-Soviet countries. And in the case of Russia, it is possible to make a conclusion not only about the presence of deep inter-regional differences, but also about a large-scale reduction in the frequency of two tragic phenomena between 2000 and 2017 during the economic recovery.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/47348/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/47348/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/47348/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Oct 2019 12:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Towards a general theory of social and economic development: Evolution of coordination mechanisms</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/33621/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 4(4): 346-385</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/j.ruje.4.33621</p>
					<p>Authors: Victor Polterovich</p>
					<p>Abstract: A new approach to understanding social and economic development is proposed, based on consideration of the evolution of coordination mechanisms. The work consists of two parts. In the first part, a critical analysis of four recently proposed theories of social development, focusing on geographical, institutional or cultural factors, is given. These theories have greatly enriched our understanding of the evolution of society, however, as analysis shows, none of them provides a satisfactory description of the driving forces and mechanisms of this evolution; the main reason is rooted in their common deficiency — monocausality. It is proposed to distinguish between two types of development, catching up and leading. The basic ideas of the theory of catching up development are presented. This approach makes it possible to explain the phenomenon of the “economic miracle” as a result of mutually conditioned changes in culture, institutions, technological progress and well-being in the context of interaction of competition, power and collaboration mechanisms.
        The second part is devoted to the theory of leading socioeconomic development. It is shown how in Western Europe, as a result of the interaction of the above four factors, specific forms and combinations of the three main mechanisms of coordination — competition, power and collaboration — emerged at each stage of evolution. I emphasize the importance of ideology and the phenomenon of technical progress in the formation of institutions of economic and political competition that contributed to the creation of the welfare state. These changes and economic growth created the conditions for further transformation of civil culture: increasing levels of trust, tolerance, altruism and cosmopolitanism, expanding the planning horizon. The decrease in the level of coercion built into the mechanisms of power and competition are demonstrated as well as the expansion of the role of collaboration. A hypothesis is advanced that the speed of this process depends on geographical factors. The idea of the welfare world is discussed.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/33621/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/33621/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/33621/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2018 15:25:48 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>From Karl Menger to Charles Menger? How Austrian economics (hardly) spread in France</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/26001/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 4(1): 8-30</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/j.ruje.4.26001</p>
					<p>Authors: Gilles Campagnolo</p>
					<p>Abstract: The father of the “Austrian” Marginalist revolution and founder of the so-called “Austrian School of economics”, Carl Menger, had a mixed reception during different periods of development of French economics. Somewhat welcomed in the early days, he was rather forgotten later on. Even his major works were not published in translation until recently. What is the reason for such a situation? Criticisms of classical political economy have to be understood in their French context. In comparison to other countries, this paper details the case of France, besides showing how later Austrians, such as Friedrich Hayek, found a limited audience. This comparative study of economic ideas in France must start with the reception of the views of the founder and the role and impact of adopting/adapting or rejecting his views by French scholars. What place did they find in French academia? From Carl Menger to a “Frenchified” Charles Menger, how was Austrian economic thought disseminated in France? This essay starts by recalling the Belle-Époque and an astonishing letter by Charles Rist for the Jubiläum of Menger, in which he deplored the lack of translation of the latter’s works. The Austrian School in France is then discussed as pure economics replaces political economy in the Interwar period, with the 1938 Paris Congress of “liberal thinkers,” as the Vienna Circle became known, also comparing issues in philosophy. The paper considers how Austrian theories of “pure science” were received in Paris from the Vienna of the 1900s, at a time of ”Crossroads,” to the present day, through the Postwar and Cold War, until a revival since the 1990s and a rethinking of economic ideas after 2008.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26001/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26001/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26001/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 17:20:58 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Economic Fluctuations in Russia (from the late 1920s to 2015)</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/27945/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 1(2): 130-153</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.1016/j.ruje.2015.11.002</p>
					<p>Authors: Sergey Smirnov</p>
					<p>Abstract: In many respects, the historical trajectory of the Russian economy during the XX century has been a terra incognita until now. As for official statistics, at least three important reasons can be given for this. First, many relevant indicators were either not measured or were kept secret and never published. Second, Russia (as the RSFSR) was a part of the USSR, and statistics for the RSFSR were much less prevalent than for the USSR as a whole (historical changes in Russia's borders also require special consideration). Third, an ideological dogma implied the absence of inflation in the planned Soviet economy; therefore, all deflators (if any) were underestimated, and all aggregates in constant and/or comparable prices were overestimated (as were the corresponding growth rates). As for the unofficial historical estimates, most of them were focused on the USSR, not on the RSFSR; therefore, there is a considerable risk in using them as a proxy for historical indicators of the Russian Federation. Hence, our first aim was to construct statistical time series that might be useful in describing the long-term trajectory of the Russian (the RSFSR and/or the RF) economy. Using previously unpublished data stored in Russian archives, we attempted to extend them as far back as possible; in fact, most of the series began in the late 1920s. Our second aim was to denote periods of growth and contraction in the Russian economy and to reveal the economic factors that caused changes in trajectory. Periods of contraction during the era of the planned economy were of special interest for us. We found that recessions had occurred, not only in the market but also in the planned Russian economy (of course, with a significant remark that contractions in the planned economy were much rarer but evidently more destructive).</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/27945/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/27945/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/27945/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2015 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
	</channel>
</rss>
	