
<rss version="0.91">
    <channel>
        <title>Latest Articles from Russian Journal of Economics</title>
        <description>Latest 6 Articles from Russian Journal of Economics</description>
        <link>https://rujec.org/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2026 14:44:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Pensoft FeedCreator</generator>
        
	
		<item>
		    <title>Kondratiev and a new methodological agenda for economics</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/56826/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 7(1): 50-66</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.32609/j.ruje.7.56826</p>
					<p>Authors: Natalia A. Makasheva</p>
					<p>Abstract: This article addresses Kondratiev’s approach to the problems of economic dynamics, cycle and conjuncture in the context of a new methodological agenda which was formulated in the 1920’s in Europe and the USA by representatives of the “brilliant generation of economists,” mostly members of the econometric movement and its adherents among Russian economists. A distinguishing feature of this generation was that its representatives were striving to make economics an objective science penetrated by rigorous ways of thinking and based on a unification between the theoretical quantitative and the empirical quantitative approaches to the study of economic phenomena. This paper discusses Kondratiev’s project on the general theory of economic dynamics as an embodiment of that methodological agenda. It also highlights a free exchange of ideas between Kondratiev and economists from different countries as a breeding ground for the emergence of the project and a necessary condition for its implementation.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56826/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56826/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/56826/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2021 13:31:08 +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>Whither modern economics? Subjective semi-sociological observations</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/30171/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 4(3): 285-304</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/j.ruje.4.30171</p>
					<p>Authors: Rostislav Kapeliushnikov</p>
					<p>Abstract: The paper summarizes main recent sociological, epistemological, methodological and ideological trends in modern economics and tries to evaluate its current state and further perspectives. Special attention has been paid to a change in economists’ methodological ideal: economic science began with trying to become like physics but actually has become like medical statistics. The paper’s general conclusion is that what we are witnessing today in modern economics is simply an ordinary working state rather than a triumph or a crisis. However, that state is not very promising since the period of new large theoretical ideas seems to be over for economics, the new atheoretical tendency in it is becoming stronger and in the very near future, economics is most likely to become more and more interventionist.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/30171/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/30171/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/30171/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 9 Oct 2018 09:06:45 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>The Austrian school of economics in Russia: From criticism and rejection to absorption and adoption</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/26002/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 4(1): 31-43</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/j.ruje.4.26002</p>
					<p>Authors: Vladimir Avtonomov, Natalia Makasheva</p>
					<p>Abstract: Dissemination and adoption of Western economic ideas in Russia have never been a simple process, always bearing marks of the socio-political and ideological circumstances of the country and inner processes in economics, as well as marks of the national intellectual tradition in general. It is not surprising that the history of Austrian economics in Russia was akin to a long road with many windings and turns. We can distinguish three different periods, or waves, each of them rather complex: from the 1890s until the late 1920s (introduction and, to a certain degree, adoption and criticism), from the beginning of the 1930s until the mid-1980s (hostile attitude and ignorance), and from the mid-1980s onwards (rediscovery, dissemination, and adoption).</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26002/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26002/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26002/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:20:50 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>The Austrian school in Bulgaria: A history</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/26005/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 4(1): 44-64</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/j.ruje.4.26005</p>
					<p>Authors: Nikolay Nenovsky, Pencho Penchev</p>
					<p>Abstract: The main goal of this study is to highlight the acceptance, dissemination, interpretation, criticism and make some attempts at contributing to Austrian economics made in Bulgaria during the last 120 years. We consider some of the main characteristics of the Austrian school, such as subjectivism and marginalism, as basic components of the economic thought in Bulgaria and as incentives for the development of some original theoretical contributions. Even during the first few years of Communist regime (1944–1989), with its Marxist monopoly over intellectual life, the Austrian school had some impact on the economic thought in the country. Subsequent to the collapse of Communism, there was a sort of a Renaissance and rediscovery of this school. Another contribution of our study is that it illustrates the adaptability and spontaneous evolution of ideas in a different and sometimes hostile environment.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26005/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26005/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/26005/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Meeting blindly… Is Austrian economics useful for dynamic capabilities theory?</title>
		    <link>https://rujec.org/article/27964/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>Russian Journal of Economics 2(1): 86-110</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.1016/j.ruje.2016.04.005</p>
					<p>Authors: Andrey Shastitko, Svetlana Golovanova</p>
					<p>Abstract: This paper relates competition studies and views on competition policy within Austrian economics to the dynamic capabilities theory. The idea of interacting research programs in economics is used to provide the frame for reflecting on particular issues of competition, on the one hand, and (1) ignorance, (2) knowledge (including tacit knowledge), (3) rationality, (4) equilibrium, (5) innovation, (6) entrepreneurship, and (7) monopoly, on the other hand. Unlike the majority of previous studies, these issues are discussed here mainly through the lens of new institutional economics. Williamson's three-level scheme is used to explain opportunities and constraints for mutually enriching exchange of concepts between different but close approaches in economic research. This paper shows that there are important interconnections and complementarities despite significant differences in objects of study and weak mutual flows of ideas and concepts.</p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/27964/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/27964/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://rujec.org/article/27964/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
	</channel>
</rss>
	