|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Incentives for academic and applied research and the reproduction of the economic community (Proceedings of the roundtable discussion at the XIX April international academic conference on economic and social development)
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-10-136-155
Abstract
The selection of the trajectories of professional development by economic researches and economic analysts today is largely determined by formal criteria for assessing the results of their activity on the part of financing organizations. As has been shown in a number of works, such a formalized assessment may distort the incentives for studying the surrounding reality and adversely affect the formation of the professional community. In this connection, at the initiative of the Association of Russian Economic Think Tanks (ARETT), a roundtable discussion was held in the framework of the XIX April international academic conference of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (Moscow, April 10—13, 2018) where these and related issues were discussed. The discussion was moderated by ARETT president A. A. Yakovlev.
About the Authors
V. M. Polterovich
Central Economics and Mathematics Institute, RAS; Moscow School of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Victor M. Polterovich
Russian Federation
Victor M. Polterovich
A. P. Zaostrovtsev
National Research University Higher School of Economics; Leontieff Center
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Andrey P. Zaostrovtsev
St. PetersburgE. T. Gurvich
Economic Expert Group; Financial Research Institute
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Evsey T. Gurvich
Moscow
N. A. Volchkova
New Economic School; Centre for Economic and Financial Research
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Natalia A. Volchkova
Moscow
L. M. Grigoryev
National Research University Higher School of Economics; Analytical Center for the Government of RF Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
А. A. Yakovlev
National Research University Higher School of Economics; Association of Russian Economic Think Tanks Moscow
Russian Federation
Andrei A. Yakovlev
Russian Federation
Andrei A. Yakovlev
References
1. Grigoryev L. (2017). Two discourses in Russian economic science. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 9, pp. 135—157. (In Russian).
2. Kordonsky S. G. (2008). Stratum structure of postSoviet Russia. Moscow: Public Opinion Fund Institute. (In Russian).
3. Muraviev A. (2013). On scientific significance of Russian journals on economics and related disciplines. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 4, pp. 130—151. (In Russian).
4. Polterovich V. M. (2017). Designing the strategies for socio-economic development: Science vs. ideology. Journal of the New Economic Association, No. 3 (35), pp. 198—206. (In Russian).
5. Rothbard M. (2003). Power and market: Government and the economy. Chelyabinsk: Sotsium. (In Russian).
6. Rubinstein A. (2008). Dilemmas of an economic theorist. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 11, pp. 62—80. (In Russian).
7. Samuels W. J. (2015). “Truth” and “discourse” in the social construction of economic reality: An essay on the relation of knowledge to socioeconomic policy. In: Origins: Qualitative shifts in economic reality and economic science. Moscow: HSE Publ., pp. 13—36. (In Russian).
8. Ganguli I. (2017). Saving Soviet science: The impact of grants when government R&D funding disappears. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 165—201.
9. Hayden F. G. (2017). An evaluation of institutional matrices. Theory which was designed to illustrate differences between Russian and Western political economies. Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 467—475.
10. Hedlund S. (2005). Russian path dependence. London and New York: Routledge.
11. Hedlund S. (2006). Vladimir the Great, Grand Prince of Muscovy: Resurrecting the Russian service state. EuroAsia Studies, Vol. 58, No. 5, pp. 781—785.
12. Hedlund S. (2013). Invisible hands, Russian experience, and social science: Approaches to understanding systemic failure. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Kirdina-Chandler S. (2017). Institutional matrices theory, or X- and Y-theory: A response to F. Gregory Hayden. Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 476—485.
14. Klimina A. (2016). The role of culture, historicity, and human agency in the evolution of the state: A case against cultural fatalism. Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 557—565.
15. Markevich A., Zhuravskaya E. (2018). The economic effects of the abolition of serfdom : Evidence from the Russian Empire. American Economic Review, Vol. 108, No. 4—5, pp. 1074—1117.
16. Paldam M. (2018). A model of the rational economist, as researcher and policy advisor. European Journal of Political Economy, [forthcoming], https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2018.03.005.
17. Rodrik D. (2015). Economics rules. The rights and wrongs of the dismal science. New York, London: W. W. Norton. https://www.economicas.uba.ar/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Economics-Rules-Dani-Rodrik.pdf
Review
For citations:
Polterovich V.M., Zaostrovtsev A.P., Gurvich E.T., Volchkova N.A., Grigoryev L.M., Yakovlev А.A. Incentives for academic and applied research and the reproduction of the economic community (Proceedings of the roundtable discussion at the XIX April international academic conference on economic and social development). Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2018;(10):136-155. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-10-136-155
Views:
979
Email this article 
