Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Two discourses in Russian economic science
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-9-135-158
Abstract
World economic science covers a huge variety of theoretical and practical issues. Russian socio-economic transformation is its natural part of theoretical studies. We believe that this is an objective situation of “two discourses”. Many Russian scientists work in the sphere of the “World discourse” and have achieved certain individual successes. The efforts of Russian scientists concentrate on national problems, so the volume of research and publications in the “Russian discourse” is much greater, as is our contribution to economic science. Interest in the “Russian discourse” on the part of the world science is limited and it cannot get a lot of place in high-profile journals, which is reflected in the ratings. Differences in the discourses are not rigid, but noticeably correspond with the groups of authors of scientific works. Works on the “Russian discourse” determine the picture of publications in the national journal field.
About the Author
L. Grigoryev
National Research University Higher School of Economics; Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Avdasheva S., Shastitko A. (2015). Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics-2014: Jean Tirole. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 5—21. (In Russian).
2. Bobylev S. N., Grigoryev L. M. (eds.) (2016). The report on human development in Russian Federation. UN sustainable development goals and Russia. Moscow: Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation. (In Russian)
3. Gaidar E. T. (1990). Economic reforms and hierarchic structures. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian).
4. Grigoryev L. M. (2003). Issues of forming the classification of economic policy problems. In: Problems of forming the expert community in Russia: Economists. Moscow: Moscow Public Science Foundation, pp. 42—68. (In Russian).
5. Grigoryev L. M. (2005). Expert community: The end of transition. Vremya Novostei, November 24. (In Russian).
6. Grigoryev L. M. ( 2010). Economics of transitional processes. In 2 vols. Moscow: MUM. (In Russian).
7. Grigoryev L. M. (2013). Scenarios of development and economic institutions. Ekonomicheskya Politika, No. 1, pp. 33—60. (In Russian).
8. Grigoryev L. M. (2017). Different goals and change of actors interests during the transformation. In: Russia in 1917— 2017: European modernization or special way? St. Petersburg: Leontief Centre, pp. 215—237. (In Russian).
9. Kouzminov Ya., Radaev V., Yakovlev A., Yasin E. (2005). Institutions: From import to raising (Lessons from the Russian reforms and opportunities for cultivation of institutional change). Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 5, pp. 5—27. (In Russian).
10. Makarov A. A., Grigoryev L. M., Mitrova T. A. (eds.) (2016). The forecast of the energy sector development in the world and Russia 2016. Moscow: INEI RAN; Analytical Center for the Government of the Russian Federation. (In Russian).
11. Maltsev A. (2016). Russian community of economists: Main features and perspectives. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 11, pp. 135—158. (In Russian).
12. Mau V. (2012). From restructuring to radical reforms: To the 20th anniversary of the start of post-communist transformation. Ekonomicheskaya Politika, No. 1, pp. 5—20.
13. Mau V. A., Kouzminov Ya. I. (eds.) (2013). Strategy 2020: A new growth model — new social policy. Moscow: Delo. (In Russian).
14. Muraviev A. A. (2011). On the Russian economic science through the prism of Russian scientists publications in national and foreign journals. Ekonomicheskiy Zhurnal VShE, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 237—264. (In Russian).
15. UN (2015). Sustainable development goals. N.Y.: United Nations.
16. Polterovich V. M. (2007). Elements of the theory of reforms. Moscow: Ekonomika. (In Russian).
17. Soloveva I. V. (2013). The concept of scientific contribution in modern philosophy of science and scientometrics. Sovremennye Nauchnye Issledovaniya i Innovatsii: (e-journal), No. 11. (In Russian).
18. Tambovtsev V. L. (ed.) (2009). Property rights, privatization, and nationalization in Russia. Moscow: Liberal Mission Foundation; Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie. (In Russian).
19. Tirole J. (2017a). An economist in the public space. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, pp. 104—122. (In Russian).
20. Tirole J. (2017b). On everyday academic research. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 9, pp. 98—134. (In Russian).
21. Shastitko A. (2016). On the methodology of institutional studies (To the 80th anniversary of Ronald Coase’s “Nature of the firm”). Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, pp. 96—119. (In Russian).
22. Shatalin S. S. et al. (1990). The program “500 days”. Moscow: EPItsentr. (In Russian).
23. Shumilov A. V., Balatsky E. V. (2016). RePEc academic ratings: Issues of construction and the role of Russian participants. Journal of the New Economic Association, No. 4, pp. 111—138. (In Russian).
24. Yurgens Yu. et al. (2009). Strategies of Russia’s social and economic development: The influence of the crisis. In 2 vols. Moscow: INSOR. (In Russian).
25. Colander D., Klamer A. (1987). The making of an economist. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 95-111.
26. Dutkiewicz P., Kulikov V., Sakwa R. (eds.) (2016). The social history of post-communist Russia. N. Y.: Routledge.
27. Leontief W. (1971). Theoretical assumptions and nonobserved facts. American Economic Review, March, pp. 1-7.
28. Леонтьев В. (1972). Теоретические допущения и не наблюдаемые факты // США - экономика, политика, идеология. № 9. С. 101-104.
29. Leontief W. (1982). Academic economics. Science, Vol. 217, No. 9, pp. 104-105.
30. Sutter D., Pjesky R. (2007). Where would Adam Smith publish today? The near absence of math-free research in top journals. Econ Journal Watch, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 230-240.
Review
For citations:
Grigoryev L. Two discourses in Russian economic science. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2017;(9):135-158. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-9-135-158
Views:
977
Email this article 
