Preview

User

Not a user? Register with this site Forgot your password?

Voprosy Ekonomiki

Advanced search
Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Russian economic education: Image of the near future

https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2023-10-5-26

Abstract

The article considers the main changes taking place in modern economics and economics education. Authors believe that the most important of them are: (1) strengthening of the applied nature of economic research work; (2) declining popularity of purely theoretical economics. Our analysis revealed a dual trend. On the one hand, the notion that neoclassical economics still prevails the academic dis­course seems to be less and less justified. On the other hand, economic education is still based on neoclassical foundations. This adds more urgency to the debate on the state of economic education. In particular, on how to train students to view big socio-economic issues from different theoretical perspectives and to strengthen the practical component of economic education. The authors prove the idea that up-to-date Russian economic education should be based on three main principles: (1) teaching students in a wide range of empirical methods; (2) development of pluralism of economic thinking manifested in the acquaintance of students with various currents of modern economic thought as well as the views of their representatives on solving topical economic and social challenges; (3) delivering to students the most comprehensive picture of the performance of the Russian economy. The potential for incorporating of these principles in the educational process is considered on the example of the bachelor’s of economics curriculum of the Faculty of Economics of Lomonosov Moscow State University.

About the Authors

A. A. Auzan
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation

Alexander A. Auzan

Moscow


A. A. Maltsev
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation

Alexander A. Maltsev

Moscow


A. A. Kurdin
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation

Alexander A. Kurdin

Moscow


References

1. Bazhenov G. A., Maltsev A. A. (2018). Modern heterodox approaches in the context of the transformation of mainstream economics. Obshhestvo i Еkonomika, No. 1, pp. 5—21. (In Russian).

2. Borokh O. N. (2019). The impact of ideology and politics upon modern economics in China. World Eсonomy and International Relations, Vol. 63, No. 10, pp. 30—41. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-10-30-41

3. Borokh O. N. (2023). China’s economic development priorities in modern official ideology. AlterEconomics, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 189—215. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31063/AlterEconomics/2023.20-1.10

4. Glaziev S. (2019). The Golden Calf cult and Russia. Izborsky Club, December 1. (In Russian). https://izborsk-club.ru/18380

5. Enikolopov R. (2022). Why asking the right questions is more important than giving the answers. Guru: Popular Economics, November 17. (In Russian). https://guru.nes.ru/pochemu-stavit-pravilnyie-voprosyi-vazhnee,-chem-davat-otvetyi.html

6. Auzan A. A., Shastitko A. E. (2021). Institutional analysis: The formation of Russian discourse in the global trend. In: Ideas of the faculty of economics: Research, discussions, discoveries. Moscow: Lomonosov Moscow State University Faculty of Economics, pp. 10—39. (In Russian).

7. Keynes J. M. (2009). Economic possibilities for our grandchildren. Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. 6, pp. 60—69. (In Russian.). https:// doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2009-6-60-69

8. Makasheva N. A. (2006). Economics in Russia in the period of transformation (late 1980s—1990s): Revolution and growth of scientific knowledge. Еkonomicheskie i Sotsialnye Problemy Rossii, Vol. 1, pp. 12—32. (In Russian).

9. Maltsev A. (2016). Russian com­munity of economists: Main features and perspectives. Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. 11, pp. 135—158. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2016-11-135-158

10. Maltsev A. А. (2018). Heterodox economic theory: Сurrent status and ways of further development. Ekonomicheskaya Politika, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 148—169. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2018-2-08

11. Maltsev A. A., Kovalev A. V. (2020). Theoretical and methodological views of Russian and Belarusian economists: Path dependence? Zhurnal Еkonomicheskoj Тeorii, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 560—573. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31063/2073-6517/2020.17-3.4

12. Tambovtsev V. L. (2014). The concept of social-economic genotype and contemporary research in management. Russian Management Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 117—132. (In Russian).

13. Tutov L. A., Shastitko A. E. (2021). Metalanguage within disciplinary discourse for scientific research programs: Invitation to a debate. Voprosy Ekonomiki, Vol. 4, pp. 96—115. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-4-96-115

14. Klepach A. N., Shirov A. A. (2021). School of macrostructural economic analysis. In: Ideas of the faculty of economics: Research, discussions, discoveries. Moscow: Lomonosov Moscow State University Faculty of Economics, pp. 40—63. (In Russian).

15. Aberg J. H. S., Becker D. (2020). China as exemplar: Justin Lin, new structural economics, and the unorthodox orthodoxy of the China model. Politics & Policy, Vol. 48, No. 5, pp. 815—835. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12376

16. Adams E. C. (2019). Twenty years of economics curriculum: Trends, issues, and transfor­mations? Social Studies, Vol. 110, No. 3, pp. 131—145. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2019.1581725

17. Akerlof G. (2020). Sins of omission and the practice of economics. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 405—418. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20191573

18. Andere J. L., Canché-Escamilla J. L., Cano-Escalante A. (2020). Consensus and dissensionamong economic science academics in Mexico. Economic Thought, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 1—23.

19. Angrist J., Azoulay P., Ellison G., Hill R., Lu S. F. (2017). Economic research evolves: Fields and styles. American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings, Vol. 107, No. 5, pp. 293—297. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20171117

20. Babina T., Xi He A., Howell S., Perlman E.R., Staudt J. (2023). Cutting the innovation engine: How federal funding shocks affect university patenting, entrepreneurship, and publications. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 138, Issue 2, pp. 895—954. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjac046

21. Backhouse R., Cherrier B. (2017). The age of the applied economist: The transformation of economics since the 1970s’. History of Political Economy, Vol. 49, Supplement, pp. 1—33. https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-4166239

22. Bhattacharyya S. (2019). Economics education in India: From pluralism to neo-liberalism and to ‘Hindutva’. In: S. Decker, W. Elsner, S. Flechtner (eds.). Advancing plu­ralism in teaching economics: International perspectives on a textbook science. London: Routledge, pp. 120—132.

23. Boudreaux D. (2020). How should Econ 101 be taught? Econlib, January 6. https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2019/Boudreauxecon101.html

24. Card D., DellaVigna S. (2013). Nine facts about top journals in economics. NBER Working Paper, No. 18665. https://doi.org/10.3386/w18665

25. Cedrini M., Fontana M. (2018). Just another niche in the wall? How specialization is changing the face of mainstream economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 427—451. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bex003

26. Chan A. S. (2021). Discussion brief: Third-wave economics. Unpublished manuscript, November 17. https://usaidalumni.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Combined-articles-about-CORE-New-Economics-curriculum-2.pdf

27. Chetty R., Friedman J. N., Hendren N., Stepner M., The Opportunity Insights Team (2020a). Real-time economics: A new platform to track the impacts of COVID-19 on people, businesses, and communities using private sector data. Unpublished manu­script, May 7. https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Short_Covid_Paper.pdf

28. Chetty R., Friedman J. N., Stepner M., The Opportunity Insights Team (2020b). The eco­nomic impacts of COVID-19: Evidence from a new public database built from private sector data. NBER Working Paper, No. 27431. https://doi.org/10.3386/w27431

29. Colander D. (2000). The death of neoclassical economics. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 127—143. https://doi.org/10.1080/10427710050025330

30. Colander D. (2005). The making of an economist redux. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 175—198. https://doi.org/10.1257/0895330053147976

31. Davis J. (2019). Specialization, fragmentation, and pluralism in economics. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 271—293. https://doi.org/10.1080/09672567.2018.1555604

32. De Benedictis L., Di Maio M. (2016). Schools of thought and economists’ opinions on economic policy. Eastern Economic Journal, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 464—482. https:// doi.org/10.1057/eej.2014.66

33. De Vroey M., Pensieroso L. (2021). Grounded in methodology, certified by journals: The rise and evolution of a mainstream in economics. LIDAM Discussion Paper, No. IRES 2021/15.

34. Dequech D. (2018). Applying the concept of mainstream economics outside the United States: General remarks and the case of Brazil as an example of the institutionalization of pluralism. Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 904—924. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2018.1518532

35. Duflo E. (2017). The economist as plumber. American Economic Review, Vol. 107, No. 5, pp. 1—26. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20171153

36. Earle J., Moran C., Ward-Perkins Z. (2016). The econocracy: The perils of leaving economics to the experts. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

37. Frey B. S., Humbert S., Schneider F. (2010). What is economics? Attitudes and views of German economists. Journal of Economic Methodology, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 317—332. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501781003792688

38. Goodwin N., Harris J. M., Nelson J. A., Rajkarnikar P. J., Roach B., Torras M. (2023). Macroeconomics in context. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003251521

39. Goodwin N., Harris J. M., Nelson J. A., Rajkarnikar P. J., Torras M. (2022). Microeconomics in context. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003252207

40. Hamermesh D. S. (2013). Six decades of top economics publishing: Who and how? Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 162—172. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.51.1.162

41. Harris C., Myers A., Briol C., Carlen S. (2022). The binding force of economics. In: D. J. D’Amico, A. G. Martin (еds.). Contemporary methods and Austrian economics (Advances in Austrian economics), Vol. 26. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 69—103. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1529-213420220000026006

42. Helgerman T. (2014). Rethinking economics. Pitt Political Review, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 62—67. https://doi.org/10.5195/ppr.2014.50

43. Herrera R. (2022). Confronting mainstream economics for overcoming capitalism. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.31063/2073-6517/2020.17-3.4

44. Keynes J. M. (1924). Alfred Marshall, 1842—1924. Economic Journal, Vol. 34, No. 135, pp. 311—372. https://doi.org/10.2307/2222645

45. Komlos J. (2019). Foundations of real-world economics: What every economics stu­dent needs to know. New York; London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315099972

46. Konat G., Karpińska-Mizielińska W., Kloc K., Smuga T., Witkowski B. (2019). Self-identification of Polish academic economists with schools of economic thought. Acta Oeconomica, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 241—272. https://doi.org/10.1556/032.2019.69.2.5

47. Koopmans T. (1947). Measurement without theory. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 161—172. https://doi.org/10.2307/1928627

48. Krugman P. (2011). The profession and the crisis. Eastern Economic Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 307—312. https://doi.org/10.1057/eej.2011.8

49. Le Pennec С., Pons V. (2023). How do campaigns shape vote choice? Multicountry evi­dence from 62 elections and 56 TV debates. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 138, Issue 2, pp. 703—767. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjad002

50. Leontief W. (1937). Interrelation of prices, output, savings, and investment. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 109—132. https://doi.org/10.2307/1927343

51. Mankiw N. G. (2021). The past and future of Econ 101: The John R. Commons award lecture. American Economist, Vol. 66, No. 1, pp. 9—17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0569434520910526

52. Marshall E. C., Underwood A. (2022). Is economics STEM? Process of (re)classifica­tion, requirements, and quantitative rigor. Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 53, No. 3, pp. 250—258. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2022.2075508

53. Mendes de Souza J.P. (2015). Mainstream and heterodox economists: An overview of schools of thought and their policy implications in the Portuguese academia. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Porto. https://repositorio-aberto.up.pt/bit­stream/10216/79839/2/36072.pdf

54. Nik-Khah E., Van Horn R. (2012). Inland empire: Economics imperialism as an impera­tive of Chicago neoliberalism. Journal of Economic Methodology, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 259—282. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2012.714147

55. Oliveira T. D., Dávila-Fernández M. J. (2020). From modelmania to datanomics? The rise of mathematical and quantitative methods in three top economics jour­nals. Scientometrics, Vol. 123, pp. 51—70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03375-y

56. Onye K. U. (2014). Neoclassical economics: The need for a reconstruction. MPRA Paper, No. 88501.

57. Panhans M. T., Singleton J. D. (2017). The empirical economist’s toolkit: From models to methods. History of Political Economy, Vol. 49, Supplement, pp. 127—157. https://doi.org/10.1215/00182702-4166299

58. Pühringer S., Bäuerle L. (2019). What economics education is missing: The real world. International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 46, No. 8, pp. 977—991. https:// doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-04-2018-0221

59. Rodrik D. (2018). Second thoughts on economics rules. Journal of Economic Methodology, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 276—281. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2018.1490441

60. Roos M., Hoffart F. M. (2020). Climate economics: A call for more pluralism and responsibility. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

61. Rosser J. (2021). Foundations and applications of complexity economics. Cham: Springer.

62. Sent E.-M. (2018). Rationality and bounded rationality: You can’t have one without the other. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 1370—1386. https://doi.org/10.1080/09672567.2018.1523206

63. Siegfried J., Colander D. (2022). What does critical thinking mean in teaching economics?The big and the little of it. Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 71—84. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2021.2004278

64. Shackle G. L. S. (1967). The years of high theory invention and tradition in economic thought, 1926—1939. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

65. Shiller R. J. (2010). How should the financial crisis change how we teach economics? Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 403—409. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2010.510409

66. Smith N. (2013). The death of theory? Noahpinionblog, August, 5. http://noahpinion­blog.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-death-of-theory.html

67. Su H., Colander D. (2021). The economist as scientist, engineer, or plumber? Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 297—312. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1053837220000231

68. Tieleman J., de Muijnck S., Kavelaars M., Ostermeijer F. (2017). Thinking like an econo­mist: A quantitative analysis of economics bachelor curricula in the Netherlands. Rethinking Economics NL.

69. Wei G. (2018). A bibliometric analysis of the top five economics journals during 2012— 2016. Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 25—59. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12260


Supplementary files

Review

For citations:

Auzan A.A., Maltsev A.A., Kurdin A.A. Russian economic education: Image of the near future. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2023;(10):5-26. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2023-10-5-26

Views: 1925


ISSN 0042-8736 (Print)

Non-profit Partnership “Redaktsiya zhurnala 'Voprosy Ekonomiki'”
Prospekt Vernadskogo 84, Moscow, 119606, Russian Federation
Phone/Fax: +7 (499) 956-01-43
mail@vopreco.ru

Processing of personal data
supported by NEICON (Elpub lab)