Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Metalanguage for conceptual diversity in economics: Edgeworth box reconsidered
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2026-4-145-160
Abstract
The article proposes a concrete example of developing a positive intradisciplinary discourse, based on a new perspective on the Edgeworth box model within the context of a discussion about the prospects of higher economic education in Russia, which unfolded, among other places, on the pages of the journal Voprosy Ekonomiki. By relaxing the explicit and implicit assumptions of zero transaction costs and the availability of structural alternatives for organizing economic exchanges, the paper demonstrates how conceptual diversity within economic science can manifest in relation to a specific model. It further shows how, in this context, critical thinking skills — as understood in the context of economic education — could be engaged both by established researchers and students for the development of a model of positive intradisciplinary discourse. The exposition is built on the idea of a specific form of metalanguage for intradisciplinary discourse, a function performed by neoclassical economic theory as it is presented in university microeconomics courses.
About the Authors
A. E. Shastitko
Lomonosov Moscow State University; Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Andrey E. Shastitko
Moscow
N. S. Pavlova
Lomonosov Moscow State University; Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Natalia S. Pavlova
Moscow
References
1. Avdasheva S. B. (2026). Success is always unsustainable, but failure can last forever (On the book by I. N. Filippova, I. P. Shabalov, A. E. Shastitko “Institutions of unsustainable success”). Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 146—157. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2026-1-146-157
2. Ananyin O. I. (2024). Economic science: The challenge of fragmentation. Journal of the New Economic Association, No. 2, pp. 193—210. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31737/22212264_2024_2_193-210
3. Auzan A. A., Maltsev A. A., Kurdin A. A. (2023). Russian economic education: Image of the near future. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 10, pp. 5—26. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2023-10-5-26
4. Buzgalin A. V., Kolganov A. I. (2023). Economic education: A qualitative renewal is necessary and possible. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 11, pp. 141—160. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2023-11-141-160
5. Varian H. R. (1997). Intermediate microeconomics: A modern approach. Moscow: UNITI. (In Russian).
6. Grebnev L. S. (2024). What comes first: Certainty of goals or scarcity of means? Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, pp. 140—158. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-8-140-158
7. Grigorуev L. M. (2024). Talents and their professors: What and how to teach? Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, pp. 111—126. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-8-111-126
8. Davar E. (2015). Crisis of economic science: Causes and remedy. Terra Economicus, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 73—83. (In Russian).
9. Jehle G. A., Reny P. J. (2011). Advanced microeconomic theory. Moscow: HSE Publ. (In Russian).
10. Kartaev F. S. (2025). Teaching macroeconomics in modern conditions. Scientific Research of Faculty of Economics. Electronic Journal, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 168—179. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.38050/2078-3809-2025-17-1-168-179
11. Kahneman D. (2014). Thinking, fast and slow. Moscow: AST. (In Russian).
12. Kuhn T. S. (2020). The structure of scientific revolutions. Moscow: AST. (In Russian).
13. Lakatos I. (1995). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. Moscow: Medium. (In Russian).
14. Mas-Colell A., Whinston M. D., Green J. R. (2016). Microeconomic theory. Books 1—2. Moscow: Delo. (In Russian).
15. Melnikov V. V. (2025). Knowledge of economy and economic thinking. Journal of Institutional Studies, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 6—17. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2025.17.1.006-017
16. Nekipelov A. D. (2019). Crisis in economic science — nature and ways of overcoming. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 23—35. (In Russian).
17. Nureev R., Runov A. (2002). Russia: Is de-privatization inevitable? (The phenomenon of power-property in historical perspective). Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 6, pp. 10—31. (In Russian).
18. Orekhovsky P. A., Razumov V. I. (2025). Economic theory of the “classboard”: Between reality and simulacrum. AlterEconomics, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 40—53. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.31063/AlterEconomics/2025.22-1.4
19. Pavlova N. S., Fedorov S. I., Shastitko A. E. (2025). The economics of mediation in contractual relationships: From a fat lawsuit to a lean agreement. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 11, pp. 122—142. (In Russian). https:// doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2025-11-122-142
20. Pindyck R. S., Rubinfeld D. L. (2001). Microeconomics. Moscow: Delo. (In Russian).
21. Polterovich V. M. (1998). Crisis of economic theory. Ekonomicheskaya Nauka Sovremennoy Rossii, No. 1, pp. 46—66. (In Russian).
22. Polterovich V. M. (2011). Formation of the general social analysis. Social Sciences and Contemporary World, No. 2, pp. 101—111. (In Russian).
23. Polterovich V. M. (2022). On the way to a general theory of socio-economic development: Towards the synthesis of two canons. Issues of Economic Theory, No. 1, pp. 48—57. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.52342/2587-7666VTE_2022_1_48_57
24. Tambovtsev V. (1994). On typology of economic systems. Economics and the Mathematical Methods, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 33—37. (In Russian).
25. Tambovtsev V. L. (1997). The state and the transition economy: Limits of controllability. Moscow: Teis. (In Russian).
26. Tambovtsev V. L. (2024). Reform of economic education or reform of economic knowledge? Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 8, pp. 127—139. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-8-127-139
27. Tutov L. A., Shastitko A. E. (2017). The experience of the subject identification of new institutional economics. Voprosy Filosofii, No. 6, pp. 63—73. (In Russian).
28. Tutov L. A., Shastitko A. E. (2021). Metalanguage within disciplinary discourse for scientific research programs: Invitation to a debate. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 4, pp. 96—115. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-4-96-115
29. Williamson O. E. (1996). The economic institutions of capitalism: firms, markets, and relational contracting. St. Petersburg: Lenizdat. (In Russian).
30. Chekansky A. N., Frolova N. L. (2021). Microeconomics. Intermediate level: Textbook. Moscow: Prospekt. (In Russian).
31. Shastitko A. E. (2024a). New institutional economic theory. 5th ed. Moscow: MAKS Press. (In Russian).
32. Shastitko A. E. (2024b). Economic education as a mirror of interdisciplinary discourse. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 137—153. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2024-1-137-153
33. Eggertsson T. (2001). Economic behavior and institutions. Moscow: Delo. (In Russian).
34. List J. (2022). Enhancing critical thinking skill formation: Getting fast thinkers to slow down. Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 100—108. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2021.2004282
35. Perloff J. (2023). Microeconomics. 9th ed. Pearson Education.
36. 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
Review
For citations:
Shastitko A.E., Pavlova N.S. Metalanguage for conceptual diversity in economics: Edgeworth box reconsidered. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2026;(4):145-160. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2026-4-145-160
Views:
347
JATS XML
Email this article 