Types of economic systems. Coordination mechanisms in different economic systems

Antipyretics for children are prescribed by a pediatrician. But there are emergency situations for fever when the child needs to be given medicine immediately. Then the parents take responsibility and use antipyretic drugs. What is allowed to give to infants? How can you bring down the temperature in older children? What medicines are the safest?

Analysis of the problem of distribution of goods leads us to the problem of interaction between economic entities. After each economic entity has assessed its benefits and costs and made a choice, society is faced with the need to coordinate the economic activities of individual entities, which includes the need to:

Coordinate decisions of manufacturers;

Coordinate consumer decisions;

Harmonize production and consumption decisions in general. This need is generated by many reasons, including the specialization of economic entities in certain types of economic activities.

Depending on how the problem of distribution of goods and, consequently, coordination of economic activity is solved, certain economic systems are distinguished. It is obvious that the characterizing features of a given economic system, the differences in the ways of distributing goods and coordinating economic activity, are determined by the differences in the institutions and institutional structures that regulate economic behavior, as discussed above.

Planned economic system of command economy (using the example of the USSR)

In countries with an administrative-command system, solving general economic problems had its own specific characteristics. In accordance with the prevailing ideological guidelines, the task of determining the volume and structure of production was considered too serious and responsible to transfer its decision to the direct producers themselves - industrial enterprises, state farms and collective farms.

The centralized distribution of material goods, labor and financial resources was carried out without the participation of direct producers and consumers, in accordance with pre-selected public goals and criteria, on the basis of centralized planning. A significant part of the resources, in accordance with the prevailing ideological guidelines, was directed to the development of the military-industrial complex.

The distribution of created products among production participants was strictly regulated by central authorities through a universally applied tariff system, as well as centrally approved standards for funds in the wage fund. This led to the predominance of an equal approach to wages. Main features:

State ownership of almost all economic resources;

Strong monopolization and bureaucratization of the economy;

Centralized, directive economic planning as the basis of the economic mechanism.

Main features of the economic mechanism:

Direct management of all enterprises from a single center;

The state has complete control over the production and distribution of products;

The state apparatus manages economic activities using predominantly administrative-command methods.

This type of economic system is typical for Cuba, North Korea, Albania, etc.

Separately, it is necessary to say about the mechanism for adopting economic plans in the command-administrative system. The plan is adopted at the highest forum of the ruling political party and in the highest legislative body of the country, which sanctifies the merging of the political, executive and legislative structures of society and is one of the main signs of totalitarianism. After this, control over the implementation of the plan, which has taken the form of a law, can be carried out on the basis of administrative, criminal and party responsibility.

The directive assignment of the plan is accompanied by the allocation of free resources for the production unit and wage funds determined by the administrative center of the country. The common center determines not only the volume of allocated resources and wage funds, but also the range of goods. Elementary analysis shows that it is impossible to do this even approximately, at least for a small group of manufacturers. And if a country has great production potential, then the very thought of directive planning makes one think about the absurdity of such plans.

The leadership center is undivided, i.e. absolutely monopoly owner of any products manufactured at the enterprises. Such economic practice in the absence of competition leads to only one result - producers can work, regardless of the quality of the product.

Manufacturers and wholesale consumers of industrial products are economically and administratively connected with each other. Consumers are deprived of the right to choose; they receive, but do not buy (although they pay money), only what is allocated to them by the manufacturer at the will of the center. The principle of matching supply and demand has been replaced by the will of the center, which materializes the adopted political and ideological decisions.

In the administrative system, the rigidity of patriarchal society is partly overcome by breaking the unambiguous connection between the economic subject and the norms of his behavior, although the role of ideological pressure is still very large. The rules and parameters of economic behavior, and the corresponding distribution of goods, are determined by the influence of the commanding (managing) subsystem, which is, first of all, the state, no matter what various forms it takes. The compliance of the behavior of an economic entity with control influences is ensured primarily by non-economic means, which, in addition to ideology, include the apparatus of coercion. Such coordination of economic activity provides opportunities for significant development through corresponding changes in the norms of economic behavior, as well as the concentration of resources under the control of the management subsystem. Its weak point is the lack of internal incentives for economic activity among subordinates external teams and limited by them in their actions of economic entities. Therefore, periods of rapid but short-lived development alternate in such systems with states of stagnation and decline.

In a command economy, an enterprise operates under a soft budget constraint. Firstly, a socialist enterprise can shift part of its resources to consumers - after all, in such a system monopoly firms dominate, or, as they say, the supplier dictates prices. Secondly, enterprises systematically receive tax breaks and deferrals in paying taxes. Thirdly, gratuitous government assistance (grants, subsidies, debt write-off, etc.) is widely practiced. Fourthly, loans are issued even when there are no guarantees of their repayment. Fifthly, external financial investments are often made not to develop production, but to cover emerging financial difficulties, and all this is at the expense of the state treasury. Leverage using the market valuable papers impossible due to the absence of such under socialism.

command market economy consumer

The market mechanism is a mechanism for setting prices and distributing resources, interaction between market subjects regarding the setting of prices, production volumes and sales of goods. The main elements of the market mechanism are demand, supply, price and competition.

Another, simpler definition states that the market mechanism is a mechanism for interconnecting the main elements of the market: demand, supply and price.

Demand is an umbrella term that describes actual and potential buyers of goods. Demand can be considered as a form of manifestation of the needs of people provided with a monetary equivalent. Demand does not express the entire set of needs, but only that part of it that is supported by the purchasing power of people, i.e. cash equivalent.

Demand, being a solvent need, in practice can take different kinds:

· Irregular – demand based on seasonal, hourly needs (for example, unloaded transport during the day, congestion during peak hours).

· Irrational – demand for goods that are harmful to health or antisocial (cigarettes, drugs, firearms).

· Negative – demand when the majority of the market does not like a product or service (vaccinations, medical operations).

· Latent - demand that arises when many consumers have a desire for something, but cannot satisfy it, since there are not enough goods and services on the market (harmless cigarettes, safe residential areas, environmentally friendly cars).

· Falling demand is a constant phenomenon (attendance at museums, theaters, etc. is decreasing).

There are also realized, unsatisfied, emerging, rush, prestigious, impulsive and other types of demand.

The market mechanism allows you to satisfy only those needs that are expressed through demand. In addition to them, there are also needs in society that cannot be transformed into demand. These primarily include goods and services for collective use, which in economics are called public goods (public order, national defense, public administration, etc.). At the same time, in a society with a developed market economy, the predominant part of needs is satisfied through demand.

Supply is an umbrella term used to describe the behavior of actual and potential producers (sellers) of goods.

Sometimes supply is defined as a set of goods with certain prices that are on the market (or on the way) and that producers can or intend to sell (definition by V. Vidyapin and G. Zhuravleva).

Price is the monetary expression of the cost (value) of a product. The price of a product depends on the cost (value) of the product itself, as well as on the relationship between supply and demand. Prices are set under the influence of a number of economic laws, primarily the law of value, according to which prices are based on socially necessary labor costs. The price is influenced by the law of supply and demand. The mechanism of its action on price manifests itself when there is a discrepancy between the supply and demand of goods in the sphere of exchange.

The peculiarity of the market mechanism is that each of its elements is closely related to price. It is its main instrument, an instrument for coordinating and adapting supply and demand to each other. The price of a product is a guideline on the basis of which entrepreneurs and consumers make their choice of which product to produce and which product to purchase. Prices provide information about the state of the market for consumers and producers.

Competition is rivalry, rivalry, the struggle between producers, suppliers of goods and services for the most favorable conditions for production and sales. It acts as a form of interaction between market subjects and a mechanism for regulating proportions, contributes to maximizing profits and, on this basis, expanding the scale of production.

All elements of the market mechanism do not exist in isolation, but interact. Their interaction represents a market mechanism. It is clear that demand is inextricably linked with supply, and both of them depend on the price level. Competition affects demand, supply and price levels. Thus, all elements of the market mechanism are in a single system.

The law of demand. Demand curve. Demand factors. Elasticity of demand

Demand is characterized by a scale that reflects the willingness of buyers in a given period of time to purchase goods at each of the prices offered on the market. What matters is the volume demanded and the price demanded.

Quantity demanded is the quantity of a good that consumers are willing to buy. The demand price is the maximum price that buyers are willing to pay for a certain quantity of a good.

There is a certain relationship between the market price of a product and the quantity demanded. The dependence of the volume of demand on prices is established by the law of demand.

The law of demand establishes an inverse relationship between prices and the quantity of goods that will be purchased at any given price.

The inverse relationship is explained by the following main reasons:

· lower prices increase the number of buyers;

· lower prices expand the purchasing power of buyers;

· market saturation leads to a decrease in the utility of additional units of the product, so buyers are willing to buy it only at lower prices.

Thus, provided other factors remain constant, an increase in the price of a product leads to a corresponding decrease in the quantity demanded, and a decrease in price, on the contrary, causes an increase in the quantity demanded.

The law of demand has a graphical interpretation in the form of a demand curve. The most important property of the demand curve is its downward (decreasing) nature.

The law of supply. supply curve. Supply factors. Supply elasticity

Supply, like demand, is characterized using a scale. It represents the different quantities of a good that a producer wishes to produce and sell at any given price in a specific time period.

The main indicators of supply are the size (volume) of supply and the supply price. The quantity (volume) of supply is the quantity of goods that sellers are willing to sell. The offer price is the minimum price at which sellers agree to sell a certain quantity of goods.

The dependence of the magnitude (volume) of supply on prices is fixed by the law of supply. The law of supply is formulated as follows: the size (volume) of goods offered is directly dependent on the unit price of this product. The quantity (volume) of supply increases as the price increases and falls as the price decreases.

Thus, the law of supply expresses the relationship between market prices and the quantity of goods or services that producers are willing to supply. This relationship between price and supply is due to two main reasons. Firstly, the higher the price, the greater the revenue and profit of the seller, i.e. there is an incentive for him to increase production. Secondly, when the price is high, new interested producers appear, offering their goods for profit.

1.3 Economic mechanism in the economic system. Ways to coordinate economic activities

The economic mechanism of the administrative-command system has a number of features. It assumes, firstly, direct management of all enterprises from a single center - the highest echelons of state power, which negates the independence of economic entities. Secondly, the state completely controls the production and distribution of products, as a result of which free market relationships between individual farms are excluded. Thirdly, the state apparatus manages economic activities using predominantly administrative and administrative methods, which undermines material interest in the results of labor.

With excessive centralization of executive power, bureaucratization of the economic mechanism and economic relations develops. By its nature, bureaucratic centralism is not capable of ensuring an increase in the efficiency of economic activity. The point here, first of all, is that complete nationalization of the economy causes monopolization of production and sales of products on an unprecedented scale. Giant monopolies, established in all areas of the national economy and supported by ministries and departments, in the absence of competition, do not care about the introduction of new equipment and technology. A deficit economy generated by monopoly is characterized by the absence of normal material and human reserves in case of an imbalance in the national economy.

Therefore, the structure of social needs was determined directly by the central planning authorities. However, since it is fundamentally impossible to detail and anticipate changes in social needs on such a scale, these bodies were guided primarily by the task of satisfying minimal needs.

Economic systems in real life develop and change. What is common to different economic systems is that they go through the same stages over time: emergence, establishment, flourishing, withering, dying. But the history of different systems is nevertheless different. The fundamental progressive trend in the development of economic systems is associated with the system’s ability to provide conditions for greater development and perfection of people.

2.1 Types of economic systems

An economic system is a specially ordered system of communication between producers and consumers of material and intangible goods and services.

The classification of economic systems is based on two main features:

form of ownership of the means of production;

a way of coordinating and managing economic activities.

Based on these characteristics, four main types of economic systems are distinguished:

Traditional Economics;

Administrative command economy;

Market economy;

Mixed economy.

A traditional economic system usually refers to an economy based on traditions and customs fixed in the minds of people.

In countries with a traditional system, small-scale production, based on private ownership of production resources and the personal labor of their owner, plays an important role. This includes peasant and craft farms.

The life activity of the traditional system is based on traditions and customs passed on from generation to generation, religious and cult values, caste and class divisions, which act as a brake on socio-economic progress.

In the traditional system, the state plays an active role. It is forced to allocate the vast majority of national income to providing social support to the poorest segments of the population and to developing infrastructure.

In these countries, in conditions of relatively weak development of national entrepreneurship, foreign capital plays a large role.

An administrative-command economy is defined as a type in which public ownership dominates, commodity-money relations are formal, and the movement of production resources and self-production is determined by the administrative center based on the system of its commands.

A market type of economy is an economic system in which, on the basis of private property, the movement of production resources and self-production are carried out under the influence of a market regulation mechanism, changes in demand, supply and prices, as well as economic benefits.

The market economic system operates on the principles of self-regulation. Factors of production are privately owned, which is designed to ensure personal independence and the opportunity to develop economic activity for each person.

Features of a modern market economy: flexible adaptive production; improving quality, reducing costs; saturation of goods and services; changing the forms of entrepreneurial activity towards increasing the share of small businesses; state regulation of competition; the formation of a new type of labor relations through workers’ participation in ownership and production management.

Mixed economy. In the case of the connection and interweaving of various forms of economy, various formations, various civilizational systems, as well as more complex combinations of various elements of the system, we can speak of mixed economic systems(mixed economy). Their distinctive feature is the heterogeneity (heterogeneity) of their constituent elements.

A mixed economy is an economic system in which both government and private decisions determine the structure of resource distribution.

Thus, we can conclude that, regardless of the type of economic system, it can never be ideal, that is, without problems. Perfect societies do not exist. Any economic system has its advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, one thing is important: which system is more effective, viable, humane, open to the world and brings progress. An inefficient economy, as can be seen from the experience of the USSR and all other social countries, dooms people to poverty, backwardness, strife and can lead to the collapse of entire states.

Home > Workshop

However, the real course of economic development, aimed towards strengthening market forces (updating monetarism in theory and practice), and not towards expanding planning and the convergence of socialism and capitalism, could not help but be noted by modern institutionalists of the late twentieth century, who paid main attention to contradictions within the institutional movement itself. Some began to view their work as a complement to the neoclassics (new institutional theory, which comes from a microeconomic understanding of the institution), while others began to look for contradictions between old and new institutionalism (the methodology of holism and individualism). The founder of the first direction is R. Coase, his followers are O. Williamson, J. Buchanan, S. Pejovic, A. Alchian and others. The main research issues are presented in the theories of transaction costs, the theory of property rights, the theory of public choice, the theory of economic organization, where the main research method is not a comparison of imperfect institutions with perfect ones, ideal with real ones, but a comparative institutional analysis of existing institutions and alternatives that exist in practice. The subject of economic research is the impact of individuals or organizations on each other within a single economic system; the ideal should be the minimal negative impact of economic entities on each other; in real life, this is achieved through a variety of forms of the main economic institutions (organizations): the market and the firm. The second direction is represented by J. Hodgson, E. Skreptani, W. Samuels and others. They consider the methodology of both holism and individualism unsatisfactory. The challenge is to formulate the relationship between action and structure in such a way as to preserve the structural nature of action and the reality of choice and action itself. The concept of the subject of economic theory should not exclude any predetermined methods or premises. Economics is the study of the processes and social relationships that govern the production, distribution, and exchange of wealth and income. (The authors point out that in this case the term “political economy” is preferable, but for tactical reasons it should not be used, lest the “enemy” interpret this as a retreat from the field of theoretical battles). However, no matter how fair the reproaches may be, in themselves they do not represent a positive economic theory, and in this sense, representatives of this trend have nothing to brag about yet. An approach that advocates the need and effectiveness of government intervention in modern conditions , begun by R. Klatzer, A. Leijonhufeud, S. Weitraub, H. Minsky - the authors of updated Keynesianism, is now continued by J. Taylor, J. Stiglitz, J. Akerlot and others. These economists build new equilibrium models, but without their main premise – automatic “clearing” of markets, i.e. without automatically matching supply and demand through rapid price changes. The impossibility of “clearing” is associated with the lack of complete and reliable information, various institutional restrictions (the concept of imperfect information), which are an organic component of the monetary economy. A monetary economy is an economy of uncertainty, which is proposed to be overcome through the model of a “representative individual” (one for all), this “one” being the state. It can maintain equilibrium through monetary regulation, setting the interest rate at the level of the "natural rate", counteracting any temporary change in economic conditions and employment, and thereby becoming the basis of stability. This concept is also called monetary Keynesianism. Regarding the neoliberal or neoclassical direction, it should be noted that in the last decade of the outgoing century, the theory of the “extreme right” was gaining particular strength. This is the theory (school) of rational expectations, whose representatives are J. Muth, R. Lucas, T. Sargent, N. Wallace, E. Perscott, R. Barrow, etc. The essence of the theory of rational expectations is that for when making decisions in the present and predicting the future, economic entities use all possible information about the economy, and not just the experience of the past, and therefore do not make systematic errors in their forecasts; in this sense their predictions are rational. From the point of view of rational expectations, a wide range of economic problems were analyzed, in particular, investing under conditions of uncertainty, the neutrality of money, the natural rate of unemployment and the effectiveness of government intervention in the economy, as well as the Keynesian model of government regulation. The initial conclusion of economists of this school was that the Keynesian doctrine of government regulation, and then the Friedman model of regulation, are ineffective, since money is not just neutral, but super-neutral to the economy. Consequently, the state actually has no leverage over the economy. The school of rational expectations argues that under a certain set of circumstances it is possible to have a one-time short-term impact on some economic indicators, and it does not matter what orientation the government belongs to - Keynesian or monetarist. Macroeconomic policy can, in fact, only imitate the purposefulness of actions at the cost of introducing additional confusion into economic life. This interpretation of the role of the state is an illusion and opposes not only supporters of state regulation, but also those who traditionally opposed this action, i.e., A. Smith and M. Friedman. On this basis, representatives of the school of rational expectations called themselves new classics. In addition to the main directions, you can pay attention to a number of problems that are of particular relevance in modern economic analysis. These are various theories of the world economy, including comparative economics and theories devoted to globalization trends and future problems.

Learning goals

1. Determine the main directions of development of economic theory at the present stage. 2. Characterize traditional institutional theories or theories of late institutionalism. 3. Characterize the theories of new institutionalism. 4. Show the features of the views of the theorists of the new classics. 5. Reveal the specifics of the views of representatives of updated Keynesianism. 6. Find out the conceptual approaches of modern theories of the world economy. 7. Show the specifics of comparative analysis.

Tests

I. A. Establish a correspondence between a term or concept and its definition a) theories of convergence; b) theories of transformation; c) institution as an expression of the principle of holism; d) institution as an expression of the principle of individualism; e) the concept of rational expectations; f) concept of imperfect information; g) economic comparative studies. 1) Explaining institutions through their correspondence to the interests of individuals who seek to form frameworks that structure interaction in various spheres; 2) understanding that different economic agents have unequal opportunities to obtain and use information, i.e., the study of decision-making under conditions of information asymmetry; 3) theories that emphasize the main changes (from the point of view of the author of the theory) in modern society and determine its modern specificity; 4) an explanation of the behavior and interests of individuals, which determine the interaction between them, through the existing stereotype of thought; 5) theories that see in the social development of the modern era (50–70s of the twentieth century) a prevailing tendency towards the convergence of two social systems - capitalism and socialism with their subsequent synthesis in a “mixed society”, combining the features and properties of each of them; 6) one of the sections of the theory of international economic relations, dealing with comparative analysis of economic systems; 7) interpretation of the method of decision-making by economic agents, who proceed not only from established stereotypes of economic behavior (information about the past), but take into account the current state of the economic environment and therefore do not make mistakes in making decisions aimed at achieving personal gain. I. B. Match characteristic features economic systems from a) to d) and from 1 to 8 statements a) property relations in a market economy; b) property relations in a centrally controlled economy; c) coordination mechanism in a market economy; d) coordination mechanism in a centrally controlled economy. 1) The variety of economic activities is agreed upon in advance (ex ante); 2) individual members of the economic community realize their goals through the market, i.e., taking into account the needs of others; 3) every individual has the right to engage in productive activities, consume, use their income and transfer property; 4) private ownership of the means of production is replaced by public ownership; 5) all planning powers are transferred to households and enterprises; 6) enterprises are passive recipients of instructions that are called upon to fulfill planned production targets; 7) the flow of information about production tasks comes from top to bottom; 8) sanctions are taken primarily by order of the authorities. II. Choose the correct answer 1. Which of the following is an institution? a) rules traffic; b) everyday purchase of cigarettes at the nearest kiosk; c) regular morning meeting with the neighbor next door. 2. Select from the given series those judgments (institutional frameworks) that fall under the definition of agreement: a) during a thunderstorm, do not be near tall trees; b) at the table the fork should be held in the right hand and the knife in the left; c) if you get lost in the forest, you should navigate the area by the sun, stars or signs (for example, the location of moss on a tree trunk); d) do not smoke in public places or disturb public peace. 3. Which of the following is an illustration of the model of incomplete rationality of action? a) the behavior of the average student when preparing for the exam; b) behavior of an excellent student; c) Robinson's behavior. 4. Representatives of what direction of institutional theory would agree with the expression: “Tell me who your friends are, and I will tell you who you are.”"? a) “old” institutionalism; b) “new” institutional economics; c) new political economy. 5. Representatives of what direction of institutional theory would agree with the expression: “Every people has the government that it deserves”: a) “old” institutionalism; b) “new” institutionalism; c) new political economy. 6. Representatives of which direction of institutional theory will not be interested in the following argument of a student who has not prepared for the seminar: “The university library was closed, the district library did not have the necessary book, and, in general, this week there are two tests and one independent work in other subjects, which also include we need to get ready"? a) “old” institutionalism; b) “new” institutionalism; c) new political economy. 7. The model of a centrally controlled economy is characterized by: a) lack of a system of sanctions; b) individual planning; c) the principle of economic subordination; d) lack of information system. 8. In the market economy model: a) no economic plans; b) there is no sanctions mechanism; c) prices serve as an indicator of scarcity; d) the state coordinates economic activities. 9. Market mechanism: a) makes plans for individual business units unnecessary; b) serves to coordinate a unified state plan; c) coordinates the plans of households and enterprises; d) does not have a system of information and sanctions. 10. Which of the following principles best characterizes a centrally controlled economy?? a) covering costs; b) implementation of the plan; c) desire for profit; d) profitability. eleven. In the market economy model: a) maximum welfare is guaranteed for every citizen; b) the state determines the content of economic activity; c) a person’s desire to acquire is encouraged in a special way; d) there is a uniform distribution of income. III. Determine who is the odd one out in the proposed list of names, where three out of four should be united by one school or one concept 1. a) Coase; b) Williamson; c) Mut; d) Buchanan. 2. a) Galbraith; b) Williamson; c) Rostow; d) Aron. 3. a) Friedman; b) Lucas; c) Sargent; d) Mut. 4. a) Friedman; b) Lucas; c) Laffer; d) Veblen. 5. a) Robinson; b) Taylor: c) Stieglitz; d) Akerlot. IV. Establish a correspondence between authors (sources) and ideas, theories, concepts A) 1. Coase. 2. Buchanan. 3. Williamson. 4. Pejovic. a) theory of social contract (contract); b) economic theory of property rights; c) transaction cost theory; d) theory of economic organization. B) 1. Veblen. 2. Coase. 3. Hodgson. 4. Galbraith. a) new institutional theory; b) new political economy; c) late institutionalism; d) early institutionalism. B) 1. Mut. 2. Stieglitz. 3. Williamson. 4. Friedman. a) monetarism; b) new institutional economics; c) new classical macroeconomics; d) updated Keynesianism. D) 1. "Old" institutionalism. 2. New institutional theory. 3. New classics. 4. Monetary Keynesianism a) the concept of rational expectations; b) the concept of imperfect information; c) the concept of bounded rationality; d) the concept of holism.

Situations, problems

1. The norms and laws that characterize the way of society determine, first of all, the integration of each individual into society. a) Based on this point of view, show the difference between the principles of individuality and collectivism. b) What role do plans play in market and centrally planned economies? c) From the principle of order operating in a particular case, a conclusion is drawn about the extent to which the state is endowed with the right to make economic decisions. Explain the differences between both economic systems. 2. The social system, which determines the coexistence of people, includes, along with the political, legal and economic, also the social system. In the 19th century There was a widespread misconception that deliberate regulation of economic activity would automatically create a rational social order. a) Show the differences in the responsibility of each person for the conditions of his existence in accordance with the guiding principles of the welfare state or society of effective competition, and critically justify his position. b) Explain why social legislation must strike a balance between the principles of “complementarity” and “solidarity”. c) Explain the importance of tariff autonomy for maintaining social compromise in society. d) Highlight the features of private property and a stable monetary exchange rate in a social market economy.

Answers and comments

I. A) a-5; b-3; at 4; g-1; D 7; e-2; f-6. B) a-3; b-4; v-2.5; g-1,6,7,8. II. 1-a; 2-b,d; 3-a; 4-a; 5 B; 6-b; 7-in; 8-in; 9-in; 10-b; 11-a. III. 1-in; 2-b; 3-a; 4-g; 5-a. IV. A) 1-c; 2-a; 3-g; 4-b. B) 1-d; 2-a; 3-b; 4-in. B) 1-c; 2-g; 3-b; 4-a. D) 1-g; 2-in; 3-a; 4-b.

Section 8. Contribution of Russian scientists to development

economic science in Russia Until now, we have considered mainly the development of foreign economic thought, since it was she who had a decisive influence on the formation of modern views on the laws and mechanism of functioning of the market economic system. At the same time, in the history of Russian economic thought there are many names that are quite widely known to the world scientific community; authors whose works have left a noticeable mark on economic science both as material for further positive research and as a basis for criticism. It is impossible not to say, at least briefly, about those representatives of economic science and economic policy, whose views had a significant impact on the development of socio-economic processes in our country in one or another period of its historical development. By world standards, the mathematical-economic direction turned out to be especially fruitful in Russian and Soviet economic science. In the 19th–20th centuries. Worked within this direction: L.Z. Slonimsky, Yu.G. Zhukovsky, V.K. Dmitriev, E.E. Slutsky G.A. Feldman, V.V. Novozhilov, L.V. Kantorovich and others. Their attention was drawn not only to the economic problems themselves, but also to how researchers solved these problems, i.e., to the methodology and technique of historical and economic analysis. These scientists emphasized the importance of mathematics in developing problems in economics. A major role in the dissemination of mathematical methods in economic science was played by Yuliy Galaktionovich Zhukovsky (1833–1907), an economist who served as manager of the State Bank. The first in the history of domestic economic science was Yu.G. Zhukovsky tried to give a mathematical analysis of Ricardo’s theory of value, profit and rent in his work “History of Political Literature of the 19th Century” (1871). The works of Ludwig Zinovievich Slonimsky (1850–1918) had a great influence on the formation of the economics and mathematics school. He proceeded from the idea of the fundamental need for abstract analysis in the study of economic reality and insisted on the mandatory use of the most important, most effective and objective element of abstract analysis - mathematics. Thus, the best representatives of domestic economic thought by the twentieth century. were at the level of European economic science. Vladimir Karpovich Dmitriev (1868–1913) proposed two mathematical models in which the price was determined by production costs, reduced to labor costs. Dmitriev's innovative approach was to introduce coefficients into the model that reflect the costs of one type of “technical capital” for the production of other types. These coefficients are set by production technology. If the entire technological chain from initial production to the release of the final product and the corresponding cost coefficients, as well as labor costs per unit of initial “technical capital” are known, then the total capital costs (in labor terms) per unit of the final product can be calculated. In essence, Dmitriev operates in the categories of direct and full costs. His system of linear equations of costs for the final product anticipated by 40 years the ideas embodied by the American economist of Russian origin Vasily Leontiev. The works of Evgeniy Evgenievich Slutsky (1880–1948) on the mathematical interpretation of consumer behavior dating back to the 20s are considered classic. Slutsky uses mathematical apparatus to study the dependence of demand for a certain good on both its price and the price of other goods, as well as the relationship between changes in prices and income. When analyzing demand, he identifies two components: changes in relative prices with stable real consumer income and changes in income with stable prices. The first component describes the situation in which the consumer remains on the same indifference curve; here only the “substitution effect” takes place. The second component reflects the situation in which the consumer moves from one level of indifference to another. The mathematical expression of the “substitution effect” proposed by Slutsky is widely used by modern science. The “integrability conditions” put forward by Slutsky (they are often called “Slutsky’s relations”), which are used to empirically test the utility function, have also gained recognition. In the 20s The economics and mathematics direction was successfully developed by young researchers who embarked on this path already under Soviet rule. The works of Grigory Aleksandrovich Feldman (1884–1958), devoted to the theory of economic growth, were pioneering in world science. Feldman built a model of the relationship between the growth rate of total income, capital productivity, labor productivity and the structure of income use. Significant advances in the analysis of economic patterns were achieved by Viktor Valentinovich Novozhilov (1892–1970). V. Novozhilov suggested new approach to the theory of equilibrium prices: he introduced the factor of scarcity of goods, as well as the balance of the commodity and money supply. Considering the problem of shortages in relation to the conditions of a centrally controlled economy, he comes to the conclusion that the shortage of consumer and production resources is a consequence of the desire of enterprises to expand the scale of their activities, regardless of costs. These ideas would later be developed by Janos Karnai in his book Scarcity (1980). Leonid Vitalievich Kantorovich (1912–1986), the only Nobel laureate (1975) in economics – a citizen of the USSR. To solve the problem of maximizing the output of the plywood trust, in 1939 he developed a mathematical apparatus called the linear programming method. Kantorovich showed that any economic distribution problems can be considered as maximization problems under numerous constraints. The influence of each of these limiters is expressed in the so-called limiting equations. Kantorovich introduces the concept of “resolving multipliers” (multipliers) - coefficients to production factors appearing in restrictive equations. He gives an economic interpretation of multipliers as the marginal values of limiting factors. The works of Nikolai Dmitrievich Kondratiev (1892–1938) became world famous. Since 1920, Kondratiev headed the Market Research Institute, created on his initiative, which was engaged in applied research on economic conditions. Using the richest statistical material (for about 140 years) on the movement of the level of commodity prices, interest on capital, wages, foreign trade turnover, as well as the production of coal, pig iron and lead in England, Germany, France and the USA, Kondratiev came to the conclusion that large cycles of the market, “long waves” of its rise and fall within each cycle. In general, Kondratiev considers cyclicality to be an internal law of economic development. The real situation, according to Kondratiev, is always determined by the superposition of large cycles lasting 48–55 years, medium (commercial and industrial) cycles lasting 7–11 years, short cycles lasting 3–3.5 years and seasonal cycles in within a year. Kondratiev uses the concept of “technical method of production”. Each technical method of production is characterized by a balance of “basic capital goods” (they are represented by production infrastructure and skilled labor) and other factors of economic and social life. The leading element of basic capital goods is production facilities. Their lifespan is determined by the length of the cycle. Scientific and technical inventions and innovations are the basis for updating basic capital goods. A recession is the result of an imbalance between basic capital goods and other factors. The renewal of these goods is the basis of recovery. But the update itself does not proceed smoothly, but in jerks. To replace capital goods, it is necessary to accumulate resources both in kind and in cash. Only when this accumulation reaches a certain level does the possibility of mass investment appear, the consequence of which is economic growth. Kondratiev proves that the average cycles falling on the “downward wave” of large cycles are distinguished by the duration of the depression and the sluggishness of the rise; on the contrary, in the middle cycles, which coincide with the “upward wave” of the large cycle, the depression is shorter, and the rise is longer and more intense. One of the foundations of Kondratiev’s worldview is the belief in the inseparability of economic management and general social conditions. Sharing in many respects the positions of the Austrian school of marginalism, he criticizes it for analyzing the economy from the perspective of an individual taken out of the social environment. According to Kondratiev, outside the social context, measuring a person’s labor efforts and the need for goods is fundamentally unthinkable. On the other side, economic changes entail serious social consequences. Based on the analysis of large cycles, Kondratiev formulates the following pattern: during periods of upward waves, the maximum number of deep social upheavals takes place: wars, revolutions, etc. Another famous Russian economist, Mikhail Ivanovich Tugan-Baranovsky (1865–1919), also dealt with the problems of the theory of cycles. . His work “Industrial Crises in Modern England, Their Causes and Impact on People’s Life” had a significant influence on the development of this area of economic science. In this work, polemicizing with the “populists,” Tugan-Baranovsky proves that capitalism in its development creates a market for itself and in this regard has no restrictions on growth and development. Although, as he notes, the existing organization of the national economy, and above all the dominance of free competition, extremely complicates the process of expanding production and accumulating national wealth. Tugan-Baranovsky criticizes not only the theory of underconsumption as the cause of crises of overproduction, but also theories that explain crises by violations in the sphere of money and credit circulation. In his theory, Tugan-Baranovsky took as a basis Marx’s idea of the connection between industrial fluctuations and the periodic renewal of fixed capital and laid the foundations for the tendency to turn the theory of crises of overproduction into a theory of economic fluctuations. We can say that Tugan-Baranovsky was the first to formulate the basic law of the investment theory of cycles: the phases of the industrial cycle are determined by the laws of investment. A disruption in the rhythm of economic activity, leading to a crisis, occurs, according to Tugan-Baranovsky, due to the lack of parallelism in the markets of different spheres during the period of economic recovery, the discrepancy between savings and investments, as well as the disproportionality in the movement of prices for capital goods and consumer goods. The main idea of Tugan-Baranovsky is that the basis of general commodity overproduction is partial overproduction, a disproportionate distribution of “people's labor.” Thus, the first is a kind of expression of the second. The views of such a prominent Russian economist as Alexander Vasilyevich Chayanov are also of interest. (1888–1937). The main range of his scientific interests is the study of processes occurring in the Russian economy, the specifics of socio-economic relations in domestic agriculture. The main subject of the scientist’s research was the family-labor peasant economy. Chayanov proved the inapplicability of the conclusions of classical economic theory to peasant farming, which was characterized by non-capitalist motivation. Extensive research allowed Chayanov to conclude that a peasant farm differs from a farm in the very motive of production: the farmer is guided by the criterion of profitability, and the peasant farm is guided by an organizational and production plan, which represents the totality of the cash budget, labor balance in time and over time. various industries and types of activities, turnover Money and products. He noted that a peasant family is not interested in the profitability of production, but in the growth of gross income and ensuring equal employment for all family members. Chayanov’s theory of cooperation is also connected with the theory of peasant farming. In his opinion, the prerequisites for development farms There is no American type in Russia, despite the fact that large-scale agricultural production has a relative advantage over small-scale agricultural production. Therefore, the optimal solution for our country would be a combination of individual peasant farms with large cooperative-type farms. IN late XIX - the beginning of the XX century. A famous theorist was the prominent statesman Sergei Yulievich Witte (1849–1915). He argued that in the conditions of rapidly developing capitalism in the country, the Russian nobility could maintain its political positions only by adapting to these new conditions. In contrast to the reactionary nobility, Witte combined the defense of landownership and all the privileges of the nobility with recognition of the need for rapid industrial development of Russia and all possible assistance to state power in this. Witte's economic views are presented systematically in his book “Lecture Notes on the National and State Economy” (1912). Political economy is defined by Witte in the spirit of the historical school as the science of the “national economy”, considered in dynamics, since “in the historical course of development of national economies, a certain correctness, a pattern is noticed, which makes it possible to judge the nature of the further development of peoples.” In this work, Witte acted as a supporter of technical and economic progress. He writes about the advantages of free labor of hired workers over the unfree labor of slaves and serfs, about the enormous importance of machines for production, about the technical and economic advantages of large-scale production over small-scale production. Witte was a supporter of the development of domestic large-scale industry. He assessed the emergence and growth of capitalist monopolies, the increased concentration of production and capital, the growth and consolidation of existing capital as a further step in the field of concentration of capital, facilitating their better use. Particularly significant is the practical contribution made by S. Yu. Witte, occupying a high position in the hierarchy of the tsarist bureaucracy, in the formation of Russia's economic policy. As Minister of Finance (from 1892), Witte carried out a number of important economic measures until 1903 that contributed to the capitalist industrialization of the country. Witte believed that the creation of one’s own industry is the fundamental, not only economic, but also political task that forms the cornerstone of our protectionist system. The development of domestic thought after October 1917 was determined, first of all, by the characteristics of the economic stages experienced by the country. The paths of development of economic science were determined not only by the economic, but also by the political and ideological goals of the ruling party. With the exception of the economic and mathematical direction, the economic ideas of this period contributed little to the “treasury” of modern economic science. At the same time, analysis and criticism of the ideas and economic practices of real socialism allowed “Western” economic trends to more accurately argue their own economic views and make significant changes to the social policies pursued by developed countries. Knowledge of the features of these stages can help us understand the difficulties that Russia is experiencing today and more confidently pave the way to the future. Briefly, these stages can be characterized as follows:

1917–1921

Bolsheviks

IN AND. Lenin - the concept of NEP; L.D. Trotsky - the concept of militarization of labor; E.A. Preobrazhensky, N.I. Bukharin: “The ABC of Communism”, “Economy of the Transition Period”.

Mensheviks

G.V. Plekhanov, P.P. Maslov - criticism of the economic transformations of Soviet power.

30s

V.A. Bazarov - a combination of genetic and teleological principles of national economic planning; A.V. Chayanov – organizational and production school; N.D. Kondratiev - the theory of large cycles of the environment.

Economic and mathematical direction

The concept of intersectoral balance of the national economy; G.A. Feldman – scheme of expanded reproduction; L.V. Kantorovich – linear programming; V.V. Novozhilov – methods for measuring national economic efficiency; V.S. Nemchinov: "Economic and mathematical methods and models"; Concept of self-supporting planning; System of Optimal Functioning of the Economy (SOFE).

50–90s

Mid-50s–mid-60s - the concept of reform of the Soviet economy and its transfer to economic methods of regulation - E. Lieberman. The concept that denied immanence commodity production and the operation of the law of value under socialism: N.A. Tsagolov, N.V. Khessin, N.S. Malyshev and others. 50–70s - development of problems of efficiency of capital investments: A. Lurie, V.V. Novozhilov, A.I. Notkin, S.G. Khachaturov; development of problems of property and convergence of its forms: M.V. Kolganov, V.V. Venediktov, P.A. Skipetrov, A.V. Koshelev, N.D. Kolesov. 60–70s – development of problems of scientific and technological progress as an integral system of “science – technology – production” and methods for determining the effectiveness of scientific and technological progress: V.D. Kamaev, K.I. Klimenko, L.M. Gatovsky, A.I. Anchishkin. The beginning of the 80s - supporters of structural, institutional and political transformations of the Soviet economy and society: G. Lisichkin, N. Petrakov, O. Latsis and others. 1985–1987. – “acceleration” strategy: A. Aganbegyan, L. Abalkin, P. Bunich, S. Shatalin. 1987–1991 – concept of “perestroika”: S. Shatalin, L. Abalkin, G. Popov. After August 1991 - the monetarist path of reform, " shock therapy": E. Gaidar.

Learning goals

1. Consider the main directions of development of domestic economic science in the 19th–20th centuries. 2. Establish what influence Russian economic science had on the formation of modern economic theory. 3. Get acquainted with the most significant representatives of domestic economic science, their main scientific works and ideas.

Tests

I. Match the term or concept with its definition a) the law of investment theory of cycles by M. Tugan-Baranovsky; b) the theory of “qualitative advantages” of peasant farming by A. Chayanov; c) N. Kondratiev’s large cycles of market conditions; d) technological coefficients of costs of products of one industry for the production of products of other industries by V. Dmitriev; e) balanced consumer budget by E. Slutsky; f) G. Feldman's scheme of expanded reproduction; g) the planned principle of measuring costs and results by V. Novozhilov; h) a method for solving the problem of distributing raw materials among different processing machines in order to maximize product output for a given assortment. 1) Iteration, during which sequential adjustments are made based on a special assessment (resolving multipliers); 2) the minimum amount of labor costs for a given volume of production is optimal in a planned economy; 3) the relationship between the growth rate of national income, capital productivity, labor productivity and the structure of use of national income; 4) the phases of the industrial cycle are determined by the laws of investment; 5) the need to satisfy the consumer demands of the family forces the peasant to continue working even at reduced wages, in conditions that are clearly unprofitable for a capitalist economy; 6) a trend that is international in nature, showing the existence of large periodic wave cycles lasting from 48 to 55 years, expressed in changes in either the level of economic indicators or the pace of their dynamics; 7) the connection between the utility function and the movement of prices and monetary income of the consumer; 8) the idea behind modern method intersectoral balance sheets, in particular the input-output method. II. Match the title of the work with the last name of the author a) M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky; b) A. V. Chayanov; c) N. D. Kondratiev; d) V. K. Dmitriev, e) E. E. Slutsky, f) S. Yu. Witte, g) V. V. Novozhilov, h) L. V. Kantorovich; i) V.I. Lenin. 1. "The development of capitalism in Russia." 2. "Industrial crises in modern England, their causes and impact on people's life." 3. "Lecture notes on the national and state economy." 4. "Russian factory in the past and present." 5. "Organization of peasant farming." 6. "Main problems of economic statics and dynamics." 7. "Toward the theory of a balanced consumer budget." 8. "Economic essays. Experience of organic synthesis of the labor theory of value and the theory of marginal utility." 9. "Methods for measuring the national economic efficiency of planned and design options." 10. "Economic calculation of the best use of resources." III. Determine who is the odd one out on these lists 1. a) Lenin; b) Maslov; c) Trotsky; d) Preobrazhensky; d) Bukharin. 2. a) Plekhanov; b) Maslov; c) Bukharin. 3. a) Bazarov; b) Feldman; c) Chayanov; d) Kondratiev. 4. a) Kantorovich; b) Dmitriev; c) Slutsky; d) Vinyarsky; d) Preobrazhensky. 5. a) Lurie; b) Novozhilov; c) Kolganov; d) Notkin; d) Khachaturov. 6. a) Novozhilov; b) Hessin; c) Malyshev; d) Tsagolov. 7. a) Aganbegyan; b) Abalkin; c) Gatovsky; d) Shatalin. 8. a) Gaidar; b) Nemchinov; c) Yavlinsky; d) Glazyev. 9. a) Friedman; b) Gaidar; c) Beltserovich; d) Abalkin.

Situations, problems

1. Which one common feature can be distinguished in the views of the majority of Russian economists belonging to various schools and directions? 2. Why do most Russian (Russian) economists of different schools and directions assign the most important role to the state in economic development? 3. What is the fundamental difference in the economic views of E. Gaidar and G. Yavlinsky? 4. Explain the reasons for the modern gap between economic theory and practice, using the example and experience of Russia.

Answers and comments

I. a) - 4; b) - 5; at 6; d) - 8; D 7; e) - 3; g) - 2; h) – 1. II. a) - 2, 4; b) - 5; at 6; d) - 8; D 7; e) - 3; g) - 9; h) - 10; i) – 1. III. 1-b); 2 - c); 3 - b); 4 - d); 5 - c) ; 6 - a); 7 - c); 8 - b); 9 - d).

Bibliography

1. Agapova I.I. History of economic thought: Course of lectures. – M., 1998. 2. Blaug M . Economic thought in retrospect. – M., 1994. 3. World history of economic thought. In 6 volumes - M., 1985–1997. 4. History of economic doctrines (Current stage) / Ed. A.G . Khudokormova - M., 1998. 5. History of economic thought in Russia: Textbook. manual for universities / Ed. prof. A.N. Markova. – M., 1996. 6. Levita R.Ya. History of Economic Thought. – M., 1998. 7. Economic encyclopedia. Political Economy. In 4 volumes - M., 1975–1980. 8. Yadgarov Ya. S . History of Economic Thought. – M., 2000.

Section 1. Initial (pre-classical) economics
representations 5 Section 2. Classical school of political economy:
origin, development, decline 14 Section 3. Using the ideas of the classical school
to criticize capitalism. Socialist teachings 26 Section 4. Revision of the ideas of the classics: historical school 37 Section 5. Marginalism and restoration of the classics
traditions. Neoclassical 45 Section 6. The idea of social control and reaction
on her in the twentieth century. 56 Section 7. Main directions and current problems
modern economic theory 67 Section 8. Contribution of Russian scientists to the development
world economic science. Development features
economic science in Russia 75 References 84 Socialist thought was widely represented in Russia in its various variants: from “folk utopian socialism” to “Marxism-Leninism”. The founders of the socialist tradition in social thought in Russia were Alexander Ivanovich Herzen ( 1812–1870) and Nikolai Platonovich Ogarev (1815–1877). They became the first Russian political emigrants and, acting as critics of both serfdom and capitalism, put forward the idea of “Russian peasant socialism.” A significant achievement of Russian and world economic thought in the mid-19th century. became the economic teaching of Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky (1828–1889). Having led the revolutionary democratic movement, he defended the demands of workers and peasants in the conditions of the development of capitalism in Russia. His merit lies in the analysis and criticism of serfdom, criticism of capitalism, and the creation of the theory of “political economy of the working people.” Analysis and criticism of contemporary political economy occupied a large place in his works. These are works such as “Capital and Labor” (1860), “Essays on Political Economy (according to Mil)” (1860). Chernyshevsky was the first in Russia to raise the question of the existence of two political economies representing the interests of opposing classes. The formation of Marxism as a movement in Russian economic thought was associated with the translation into Russian of the works of K. Marx and F. Engels, as well as the works of the largest representatives of the English school of political economy and with the dissemination of their ideas in Russian scientific circles and among practical economists . The first translator of "Capital" (the first volume) into Russian was German Aleksandrovich Lopatin (1845–1918), who then played a major role in the subsequent study of Marxist literature in Russia. Nikolai Ivanovich Sieber (1844–1888) also made a significant contribution to the dissemination of the ideas of Marxism in Russia, setting out in detail the main provisions of the second volume of Capital in the series of articles “The Economic Theory of Marx” . In 1885 N.I. Sieber published his main work, David Ricardo and Karl Marx. their socio-economic research" . In this work, he outlined in detail the Marxist theory of surplus value, emphasizing that only additional labor expended on the production of certain goods can create surplus value. Sieber, like Lopatin, did not consider himself a Marxist, although he shared many of the tenets of Marxism and, in general, was openly sympathetic to this theory. The first Russian Marxist, who played an extremely important role in the formation of the Marxist movement in Russia was Georgy Valentinovich Plekhanov (1856–1918). As a theorist, Plekhanov came a long way and wrote many works; His views throughout his creative life changed from populism to Marxism at the end of the 19th century. and to the retreat from the ideas of orthodox Marxism at the beginning of the 20th century. His main works: “The Land Community and Its Probable Future” (1880), “Socialism and Political Struggle” (1883), “On the Question of the Development of a Monistic View of History” (1895). In the 90s. 19th century Another trend in domestic economic thought arises, which quickly becomes very influential. This was the so-called “legal Marxism”. Although representatives of this movement adhered to the positions of Marxism, they were free to publish their works in the Russian press. Its largest representatives were P.B. Struve, M.I. . Tugan-Baranovsky and S.N. Bulgakov. The theorist of legal Marxism was the economist and philosopher Pyotr Bernhardovich Struve (1870–1944). His main works: “Critical Notes on the Economic Development of Russia” (1894) and “On the Question of Markets in Capitalist Production” (1899). M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky (1865-1919) - author of such works as "Capitalism and the Market" (1898), "Russian Factory in the Past and Present" (1899) and "Industrial Crises in Modern England, Their Causes and Impact on People's Life" (1894). At first, Sergei Nikolaevich Bulgakov (1871–1944) also took the position of legal Marxism. The following works of this period belong to his pen: “On markets in capitalist production” (1897) and “On the question of the capitalist evolution of agriculture” (1899). Legal Marxists did not agree with the Narodniks’ assertion that Russia was following a unique historical path, non-capitalist in its essence. They believed that Russia fits well into the patterns of historical and economic evolution common to all countries. Criticizing the revolutionary orientation of Marxism, in particular, the idea of the inevitability of a socialist revolution and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, they advocated an evolutionary path of socio-economic development and this “brings them in common” with the social democratic views that have become quite widely developed in Western Europe. Consistent (orthodox) Marxism in pre-revolutionary Russia was represented primarily by the works Vladimir Ilyich Lenin(1870–1924). Of his numerous theoretical heritage of this period, “Imperialism, as the highest stage of capitalism” (1916) should be especially highlighted. This work was the foundation for the development of the theory of socialist revolution, the development of strategy, tactics and program positions of the Bolsheviks and the revolutionary internationalist groups that joined them during the war years in international social democracy. Lenin concludes that a new, special era has arrived in the development of capitalism. Based on a study of statistical materials characterizing the latest economic development of capitalist countries, Lenin identifies facts concerning the concentration of production in the largest enterprises and the development of the joint-stock form of capital. He associates with these phenomena the further development of the processes of monopolization of the capitalist economy, the strengthening of the oppression of syndicates and trusts, their redistribution in their favor of part of the national income by inflating prices while artificially limiting the volume of production, which makes the competition between the resulting giant enterprises especially ruinous. Monopoly, according to Lenin, inexorably makes its way in the field of banking. Simultaneously with the concentration of production and in connection with it, a process of extraordinary development unfolded in the developed capitalist countries. rapid growth banking capital concentrated in a small number of giant banks. The interests of banks and industry were increasingly intertwined and conditions were created for the merging of giant banks and the largest industrial companies through a kind of “personal union” (a system of intertwined directors), as well as through share ownership. IN AND. Lenin showed that the merger of the monopoly capital of banks and industry led to the formation of a qualitatively new form of capital - financial capital , defining the appearance of a new era in the development of capitalism. Based on financial capital, which significantly predominates over all other forms of capital, the dominance of the financial oligarchy becomes inevitable – a group of the richest monopolists controlling key areas of the economy and politics. The main conclusion made by V.I. Lenin: imperialism is the highest and last stage development of capitalism, the eve of the socialist revolution.

Shapiro Natalia Alexandrovna

Goretsky Evgeniy Leonidovich

HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT

Workshop

Editors
L.G. Lebedeva, T.G. Smirnova

Corrector
N.I. Mikhailova

_________________________________________________________________________

LR No. 020414 dated 02.12.97

Signed for publication on June 10, 2002. Format 6084 1/16. Boom. pissing

Offset printing. Conv. oven l. 5.12. Pech. l. 5.5. Uch.-ed. l. 5.38

Circulation 300 copies. Order No. C 23

________________________________________________________________________

SPbGUNIPT. 191002, St. Petersburg, st. Lomonosova, 9

IPC SPbGUNiPT. 191002, St. Petersburg, st. Lomonosova, 9

Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. – M., 1931. T. 2. P. 34. See: Institutionalism / Economic Encyclopedia. Political Economy. – M., 1975. T. 2. P. 28. Keynes J.M. General theory of employment, interest and money. In book. : Selected works: Trans. from English. – M.: Economics, 1993. Witte S.Yu. Lecture notes // Ural. 1991. No. 11. See: History of economic thought in Russia: Textbook. allowance / Ed. A.N. Markova. – M., 1996. P. 110–111.

Coordinate decisions of manufacturers;

Coordinate consumer decisions;

Harmonize production and consumption decisions in general. This need is generated by many reasons, including the specialization of economic entities in certain types of economic activities.

Planned economic system of command economy (using the example of the USSR)

State ownership of almost all economic resources;

Strong monopolization and bureaucratization of the economy;

Centralized, directive economic planning as the basis of the economic mechanism.

Main features of the economic mechanism:

Direct management of all enterprises from a single center;

The state has complete control over the production and distribution of products;

The state apparatus manages economic activities using predominantly administrative-command methods.

This type of economic system is typical for Cuba, North Korea, Albania, etc.

In the administrative system, the rigidity of patriarchal society is partly overcome by breaking the unambiguous connection between the economic subject and the norms of his behavior, although the role of ideological pressure is still very large. The rules and parameters of economic behavior, and the corresponding distribution of goods, are determined by the influence of the commanding (managing) subsystem, which is, first of all, the state, no matter what various forms it takes. The compliance of the behavior of an economic entity with control influences is ensured primarily by non-economic means, which, in addition to ideology, include the apparatus of coercion. Such coordination of economic activity provides opportunities for significant development through corresponding changes in the norms of economic behavior, as well as the concentration of resources under the control of the management subsystem. Its weak point is the lack of internal incentives for economic activity among economic entities subordinate to external commands and limited by them in their actions. Therefore, periods of rapid but short-lived development alternate in such systems with states of stagnation and decline.

In a command economy, an enterprise operates under a soft budget constraint. Firstly, a socialist enterprise can shift part of its resources to consumers - after all, in such a system monopoly firms dominate, or, as they say, the supplier dictates prices. Secondly, enterprises systematically receive tax breaks and deferrals in paying taxes. Thirdly, gratuitous government assistance (grants, subsidies, debt write-off, etc.) is widely practiced. Fourthly, loans are issued even when there are no guarantees of their repayment. Fifthly, external financial investments are often made not to develop production, but to cover emerging financial difficulties, and all this is at the expense of the state treasury. It is impossible to use borrowed funds using the securities market due to its absence under socialism.

command market economy consumer

Read also:

B. method of separating a mixture of substances, based on the different distribution properties of various substances between two phases - solid and gas
V. In the field of socio-economic problems of the northern regions of Russia.
A30. Hellenistic Egypt (general characteristics of socio-economic and political relations).
A31. Seleucid Power (general characteristics of socio-economic and political relations).
An absorption chiller is designed to produce cold water, which can subsequently be used as a refrigerant in air conditioning systems.
ADAPTATION TO DENTAL PROSTHESES AS A MANIFESTATION OF PLASTICITY OF NERVE CENTERS. MECHANISMS OF ADAPTATION. ROLE OF RECEPTORS OF THE ORAL MUCOSA IN ADAPTATION TO DENTAL PROSTHESES.
Analysis of geo-economic features of the development of Norway.
ANALYSIS OF THE MAIN TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC INDICATORS OF THE ENTERPRISE OPERATION IN DYNAMICS
Analysis of the main financial and economic indicators of the enterprise

Economic systems- is a set of interconnected economic elements that form a certain integrity, the economic structure of society, the unity of relations that develop regarding the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of economic goods.

As a result, 4 types of economic systems are distinguished:

1. traditional economy;

2. administrative-command economy;

3.market economy;

4.mixed economy.

Traditional economy– a closed system of natural economy, characterized by manual labor, routine technologies, a multi-structure economy, a low level of development of the productive forces, an active role of the state in the economy, etc.

Administrative command economy– an economy with dominant state ownership, state monopoly, where commodity-money relations are formal, the movement of resources is carried out by the administrative center, strict centralism of the entire economy.

Market economy– an economy with a predominance of private property, limited government intervention in economic processes and a market coordination mechanism.

Mixed economy– has several lines of formation, that is, a combination of the private and public sectors, a combination of the market and government regulation, a combination of capitalism and the socialization of life. In addition, there are various elements in a mixed economy, such as: Joint-Stock Company, social partnership, contractual relations, etc.

Economic theory considers two different methods of coordination: spontaneous (spontaneous) and hierarchical (centralized).

In spontaneous orders Information needed by producers and consumers is transmitted through price signals. An increase or decrease in the price of resources and the goods produced with their help tells economic entities in which direction to act, i.e. what, how and for whom to produce. In any economic system, the manufacturer must calculate its costs and benefits received. But the benefit-cost ratio can only be calculated using price mechanism. This mechanism coordinates people's economic choices. Such a mechanism or order is called spontaneous (spontaneous). Spontaneous order arose naturally during the development of human civilization. The market is a spontaneous order.

There is another way to obtain information about what, how and for whom to produce. This is a system of orders and instructions, going from top to bottom, from a certain center to the direct manufacturer. Such a system is called hierarchy. An example of hierarchy is a primitive community where the leader determines everything and everyone. Hierarchy is also a command-administrative system (the state with the help of the State Planning Committee). The enterprise carries out its activities in the form of a hierarchy. The hierarchy is not based on price signals, but on the power of a leader or central government agency.

In reality, there is a coexistence of spontaneous orders and hierarchies.

| | 3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Who coordinates the choices made by people in the process of their daily economic activities? After all, each person is unique, each has his own tastes and preferences, his own ideas about the ways in which it is necessary to carry out the production and distribution of goods.

Economic theory considers two different modes of coordination: spontaneous, or spontaneous order and hierarchy.

In spontaneous orders, information needed by producers and consumers is transmitted through price signals. An increase or decrease in the price of resources and goods produced with their help tells economic agents in which direction to act, i.e. what, how and for whom to produce. In any system, the manufacturer must calculate its costs (expenses) and the benefits received. This also applies to the consumer. But how can this be done if the person leading household or is the head of the enterprise unable to look around the entire “economic space”? Of course, in Robinson's household on a small island or within a relatively small primitive tribe, the quantity of available resources and the combinations of their alternative uses are (quantitatively) quantities that can be accounted for. But how is it possible to calculate the ratio of benefits and costs not in small groups, but in the “expanded order of human cooperation,” as F. Hayek calls the modern economic system called capitalism? After all, information about available resources, about the tastes and preferences of consumers is scattered, scattered, it is not located in some kind of Center. Under such conditions, only the mechanism of price fluctuations, or opportunity costs, can coordinate people's economic choices. Such an economic system was called by F. Hayek a spontaneous (spontaneous) order, which emphasizes the evolutionary nature of its emergence, independent of anyone’s intentions or plans. Spontaneous order arose naturally, during the development of human civilization.

But there is another way to obtain information about what, how and for whom to produce. This is a system of orders and instructions, going from top to bottom, from a certain Center to the direct executor (producer). Such a system is called a hierarchy. An example of a hierarchical order could be a primitive community, where the leader of the tribe decided who, how and what to do in the process of economic activity. Hierarchy is also a command-administrative system, or socialism, where the state, represented by the State Planning Committee or the highest party authorities, gave orders what exactly to produce, distributed resources, and assigned suppliers to consumers. The company also operates in the form of a hierarchy, where the head of the enterprise gives orders to his subordinates. The hierarchy is based not on price signals, but on power, personified in the person of the head of the company or the central governing government body.

In the real world, there is a coexistence of spontaneous orders and hierarchies. But on what does the very fact of this or that organization of society depend?

To do this, it is important to introduce a new category that is used by economic theory, namely, transaction costs. These costs are not associated with production as such, but with the costs associated with it: searching for information about prices, about counterparties to business transactions, the costs of concluding a business contract, monitoring its implementation, etc. Not all components of transaction costs are listed here. However, even from this brief definition it is clear that a particular system will function as a hierarchy or as a spontaneous order, largely depending on the magnitude of transaction costs.

Let’s imagine that in the “expanded order of human cooperation” it is necessary to collect information about potential counterparties to exchange transactions, monitor the execution of the contract, etc. The cheapest way here will be spontaneous order, because “gathering into a single fist” all the scattered information will be a task beyond the capabilities of any Center. But within the company, a way that saves transaction costs is hierarchy. Here, workers do not interact with each other through price signals; An employee (for example, a worker assembling cars or a clerk in a bank) learns from his immediate superiors about what to do and what to produce.

Thus, we have come to an interesting conclusion: it is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of spontaneous orders or hierarchies not from the point of view of normative assessments (good or bad), but from the point of view of saving transaction costs. Of course, this is not the only criterion, but it is very important. This approach helps to understand why the socialist economic system turned out to be ineffective: the attempt to build all social production as a firm, or “single factory,” as V.I. Lenin wrote, turned out to be untenable due to the huge transaction costs associated with regulation from the Center (Gosplan).

As the number of parties involved in transactions increases, the complexity of transactions increases. In fact, the initial buyer and seller very rarely see each other in direct negotiations. Products are often manufactured before purchase with a price already set before the buyer even knows the product exists. What coordinates these thousands of people working to contribute, perhaps years before the final product is consumed? How will they know what to do? How can they be sure they are making the right product?

PRACTICAL EXAMPLE

Let's look at this using the example of a loaf of bread. Before the consumer sees the bread in the store, someone must bring it to the store, bake it, order flour, which in turn must be ground by someone, and before that the grain must be grown. Consequently, to produce that particular loaf of bread, hundreds of individual decisions were made long beforehand.

Neoclassical economic theory assumes that price (the “invisible hand”) is able to provide all the information to act on consumer demands for the optimal allocation of resources.

The invisible hand of the market is an economic tool developed by A. Smith that controls buyers and sellers in the market within the framework of market self-regulation without government intervention.

However, in reality, the distribution of resources is not random, but it is not at all “optimal.” All parties involved in a decision examine their own parts of the system, considering individual possibilities. This is why the parties have different needs regarding the system. These needs can sometimes be in conflict with each other.

FROM THE PRACTICE OF MODERN RUSSIA

There are four types of associations (institutions) representing professional and industry interest groups and differing in the individual characteristics of their members, maturity organizational structure, access to resources and functions performed and resulting from the process of institutionalization of the interests of the economic entities included in them.

The first type is the most well-known and influential business associations - the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, OPORA Russia and the FNPR, which in their activities rely on an extensive and highly diversified set of business entities and are in constant, active interaction with government agencies authorities.

The second type is the so-called “appendage associations”, their main characteristics are a wide but rather heterogeneous set of participating entities and insufficient resource availability.

The third type is “industry representatives” - numerous and dynamic associations, including representatives of large and medium-sized businesses, to a greater extent than all others, focused on realizing the interests of the entities included in them (ATOP-Association of Tour Operators of Russia, NP Russoft-Association software development companies, etc.).

The fourth type - self-regulatory organizations - is the smallest group of associations, uniting fairly homogeneous business entities, closely interacting with government authorities at various levels, but having certain restrictions on lobbying activities.

Today there are 174 chambers of commerce and industry in Russia, including 81 chambers of constituent entities of the Federation and 93 chambers municipalities. Members of the RF CCI are 207 unions, associations and other associations of entrepreneurs at the federal level, 500 business associations at the regional level. As of June 2014, there were 356 organizations in the Register of Members of the RSPP. Among Russian associations of entrepreneurs, 41% are public organizations, 32% - associations and unions and 27% - non-profit partnerships.

R. Marion (1976) defines coordination as a process through which harmony is established between the various functions of the vertical value added system. The following questions are important for the coordination process.

1. What was produced and sold (quantity and quality)?
2. When was it produced and sold?
3. Where is it produced and sold?
4. How is it produced and sold? (That is effective use resources?)
5. What regulators and adaptive mechanisms are needed to respond to rapid changes in demand, new technology or other changes in profit incentives?

Schaeffer and Stutz (1985) identify four levels of coordination.

1. Coordination in firms (micro-coordination).
2. Coordination between individual firms (micro-coordination).
3. Coordination of complete supply with complete demand for consumer goods or industries at every step of the production and distribution process (macro coordination).
4. Coordination of aggregate demand with aggregate supply for the economy as a whole (macro coordination).

Coordination analysis must include all these levels. Coordination issues and mechanisms are interrelated between these levels, and thus management structures at all levels must address expertise in coordination issues.

When commodities are physically transferred in an economic system, economists usually talk about exchange and transaction.

A transaction is a legalized transfer of property from one business entity to another.

PRACTICAL EXAMPLE

If I own an apple, then I can either eat it, save it for the future, sell it or give it away. By selling or giving it away, I free myself from ownership and transfer it to someone else, who in turn gets the opportunity to eat it or, for example, sell it, etc. The apple may remain untouched and lie on the table during this process; only the ownership relationship changes.

Transaction is a central concept in institutional economics. Changes in property rights constantly occur between people or groups of people. The phases of a transaction in the theory of the firm are presented in Fig. 7.1.

Rice. 7.1.

The most common type of transaction is commodity exchange transaction on the market.

A barter transaction is a transaction in conditions of scarcity, in which the buyer and seller have equal legal status regarding the transaction.

The reason for trade is scarcity. Both parties - buyer and seller - have equal legal status regarding the transaction.

An organizational transaction is a transaction within an organization not because of scarcity, but for the purpose of achieving efficiency.

An organizational transaction takes place in a hierarchy, such as when a benefit is moved from one department to another in an organization. The reason for the organizing deal is not scarcity, but efficiency brought about by the division of labor.

Regulatory transactions differ from barter and arrangement transactions in the following way: they are an integral part of negotiations to reach an agreement among several participants who have the power to distribute advantages and disadvantages to the members of the joint venture.

A normative transaction is one in which negotiation is an integral part to reach an agreement among several participants who have the power to allocate advantages and disadvantages to the members of the joint venture.

This is the type of transaction that dominates political decision-making, where citizens and their representatives try to reach a political agreement.

A grant or status transaction is a one-way transaction where the owner of the goods loses ownership without compensation.

This type of transaction may be based on friendship or status, habit or altruism. Such transactions are common between friends and relatives, such as family members. Most transactions in tribal societies base their transactions on statuses and grants (Table 7.1).

Organized societies build formal institutions through legislation and other means of creating rules. However, even in the most “organized” societies, most rules are informal and based on cultural habits and behavioral norms.

Table 7.1. Comparative analysis different types of transactions

Institutions are the rules of the game in society or, more formally, the designed constraints that shape human interaction.

Rules help predict the behavior of others in various situations. If the set of rules that one individual uses is significantly different from the set of rules of another, this may inhibit their interaction and prevent them from completing a transaction. "Getting to know" a person means learning something about the rules a person uses in certain situations. This knowledge of expected behavior makes interaction easier. In other words, it reduces uncertainty and thus transaction costs.

Institutional societies create its own rules based on common law and laws for specific purposes. Organizations have their own rules for managing interdependence. Organizations' rules may be less explicit, such as a common trade culture or active modes of adaptation, such as commercial marketing. An organization's internal rules may be explicit, such as an organizational description of structure, or implicit, such as the prevailing organizational culture. People form their own rules for interaction.

Rules are the cumulative product of past transactions. They form a hierarchy.

Rules evolve over time; at the top of the hierarchy (individual behavior) rules develop more quickly, and at the bottom (culture and custom) - more slowly. Rules for these types of interdependence may emerge in different cultures at different levels of hierarchy.

Culture and traditions act as the basis for human interaction. Over the course of a person's or organization's life, experiences from the past are added to the body of knowledge, often leading to gradual changes in shared traditions. Past transactions affect the behavioral practices of the people making those transactions, which in turn increases the pressure to change standard modes work of organizations.

If the pressure is strong and widespread enough, it often affects legislation and gradually becomes part of culture, custom and history. Another way of forming a rule is by actively acquiring knowledge from other cultures. Thus, exploration and interaction with other cultures can play an important role in developing ways to reduce society's transaction costs over time.

If the conditions that create interdependence remained constant, then the established settlement would evolve to adapt as much as possible to existing conditions interdependence. This development would ultimately reduce transaction costs to a minimum. Planning transactions would be easy because the behavior of people and organizations could be predicted perfectly.

However, the conditions of interdependence are constantly changing, making existing rules obsolete. New products must be adapted to environment, which is the result of past transactions. These new products (eg, biotechnology products) may require rules that do not exist in the framework containing legacy rules.

The hierarchy of rules is the result of a process of interaction between various actors capable of influencing the implementation of the rules.

Given a certain distribution of power, the hierarchy of rules reflects the process of saving transaction costs in society. A transaction with distinctive features may need special rules, or the rules may have to be determined in court, often after the transaction has occurred and a dispute has arisen. The key question for society is what level of rule creation (and implementation) is least costly for a given type of transaction (Figure 7.2).

Rice. 7.2.

Due to the interdependence of the various rules, they do not all correspond exclusively to categories. Cultural heritage can directly affect individual behavior, which in turn can affect the formation of laws. Another way to explain the hierarchy of rule formation is that, starting from the foundation of culture and tradition, more high levels care about maintaining the necessary rules. Organizational rules provide the basis for individual behavior.

PRACTICAL EXAMPLE

In different cultures, the combination of monetary and non-monetary transactions can occur according to rules created in different levels hierarchy. For example, many conflicts in Japan are resolved confidentially by the parties. In the United States, the same types of conflicts are resolved in court. The number of lawsuits per capita in California is 20 times higher than in Japan.

In most developed countries, liability for an unsatisfactory product or service is placed on the manufacturer through consumer laws. Without this legislation, responsibility for the transaction would lie primarily with the consumer, and only secondarily with the manufacturer.

Understanding rule structures important for creating new rules. If proposed rules differ too greatly from existing ones, the transaction costs of adopting new rules may be so high that they remain unadopted. In some developing countries it can be observed dual rule structures.

PRACTICAL EXAMPLE

For example, during the colonial era, colonies built rule structures based on foreign cultures. An original set of rules based on tradition and history prevailed among the people, especially in rural areas, and a new culture spread among the new establishment. A similar situation arose after the collapse of the USSR.

The dynamics of the rule-making process create the institutional environment for each transaction. Since each transaction occurs within a specific set of rules, transactions can also shape the structure of the rules.

Zudin A.Yu. Associations - Business - Government. “Classical” and modern forms of relations in Western countries. M.: State University Higher School of Economics, 2009. S. 8.