The global economy is in recession due to the pandemic of the coronavirus infection COVID-19. Russia’s GDP in 2020 fell by 3.1% in relation to the level of 2019, so that the decline was more moderate than in 1998 (–5.3%) and 2009 (–7.8%). In the coming years, the Russian economy will have to recover and enter a new long-term growth path. At what expense and in which industries will this happen? Based on the experience of previous crises and using industry accounts of economic growth and Russia KLEMS data, we have examined possible sources of recovery of the Russian economy after the crisis of 2020. By analogy with the recovery after 2008—2009, it is likely to be associated with increased demand for raw materials on world markets and the reaction of the Russian oil and gas complex. Stagnation after 2008—2009 is due to a decrease in production efficiency, especially in the expanded mining complex (EMC), as well as the cessation of technological catching-up. Growth stimulation measures should include increasing the efficiency of the EMC, providing the adaptation of advanced technologies, and preserving existing adaptation channels in times of crisis — for example, successful export-oriented industries integrated into global value chains. In the long run sustainable growth assumes diversification of the economy.

The main application of input—output models is the analysis and forecasting of impact that changes in the final consumption volume and composition have on the production structure. The paper presents results of type I and II multipliers calculation for national and regional (evidence from Moscow) economies based on the input—output tables for 2016 for aggregated economic activities. The attention is devoted first of all to structural aspects of multiplicative effects and to the analysis of the variability of regional multipliers calculation results depending on the approaches. To derive regional multipliers we apply location quotient-based approaches. We show that national type II (including induced effects) and regional multipliers estimations may be highly sensitive to the estimation technique choice. Results from such calculations should be interpreted with consideration to differences of the used techniques and their tendencies to under- or overestimate effects of the final consumption structural changes.

Import substitution becomes a hot topic in Russia every time world oil prices fall and the exchange rate of the ruble weakens. Since 2014, it has become a key area of state economic policy. Despite this, various indicators for assessing this phenomenon in the Russian economy have different trends and do not allow to make a clear conclusion about the results achieved. There is also no comprehensive assessment of the impact on economic growth. The paper analyzes approaches to the construction of relevant indicators, taking into account the model tools of the inter-industry balance, offers a macroeconomic method for decomposing GDP growth in the areas of its final use, with the allocation of the contribution of import substitution by increasing the availability of finished domestic products, and localization of production, domestic import substitution, and export-oriented one. Based on the results of calculating the corresponding indicators for 1996—2019, the conclusion is made about the significance of this factor for the dynamics of economic growth in Russia, especially in the periods of high volatility of economic environment. A deliberately high error of forecasts is noted when applying the traditional approach of GDP decomposition from the final demand side, which assumes the preservation in the short term of the proportions of consumption between domestic and imported finished products, materials and components.

The article discusses the status of quantitative and qualitative data in economic sciences, as well as methods for transforming data into information and knowledge. Particular attention is devoted to content analysis as a set of methods for aggregating, processing and analyzing qualitative data; its forms (qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods) and uses by economists. Content analysis appears to be particularly suitable for non-orthodox economists because of their refusal to consider price as the only source of economic information. The content analysis of metadata of articles indexed in Web of Science and eLibrary suggests that Russian economists still have insufficient familiarity with the principles of content analysis and their applications to research compared with their Western counterparts. It is argued that the creation of on-line platforms for content analysis and on-line banks of qualitative data may become a trigger for changing this situation.

Modern economic science is experiencing difficulties in solving theoretical and practical problems, including its inability to predict future economic crises, and, after their onset, the effective ways to overcome them. This is largely due to the fact that representatives of different theories have different assessments of the ongoing processes in the economy and offer essentially different and often mutually exclusive ways to solve economic problems. The search for a common language and ways to unite the efforts of economists in achieving social progress is on the agenda. The paper addresses the possibilities of productive interaction between scientific programs in economics via mutual enrichment of ideas, and shows what role metalanguage plays in this process. It claims that metalanguage will allow representatives of various research programs to form a realistic view of each other’s concepts, and not to criticize the caricatures of their opponents’ theories.

Russian budget legislation imposes fairly strict restrictions on Federal subjects’ borrowing and increasing public debt. At the same time, even the existing potential for attracting borrowed resources, which could significantly expand the opportunities for implementing investment expenditures aimed at stimulating economic development, is used only to a small extent by the regions. Meanwhile, in international practice, borrowed funds are an important source of financing budget investments. It is particularly paradoxical that the most creditworthy regions of the Russian Federation are clearly underutilizing their ability to attract debt. Based on the analysis of the dynamics of public debt, the practice of budget planning and borrowing of a group of the most creditworthy subjects of the Federation in 2010-2019, the article considers the problematic aspects of existing approaches to the regulation of borrowing and debt, as well as possible ways to improve them.

This work examines the current world experience in assessing the sensitivity of household mortgage borrowing to interest rates. The data of the “bank— region—year” format are used to estimate supply and demand equations for housing loans issued by banks in the regions of the country in 2015—2018. Our estimations have revealed that the demand on the mortgage market in the regions is sensitive to the price of loans: when weighted average rate at which a bank issues mortgages in a region is lower by 1 percentage point it is associated with an increase in demand up to 20—25%, all other things being equal, that is, when taking into account the number of offices of a bank in that region, the economic situation and region’s characteristics in that year. Demand for mortgages is elastic at interest rates, which means that by lowering rates on mortgage programs, banks can expect an increase in demand, due both to an increase in overall demand for loans and to an overflow of borrowers from other banks. Consequently, it was confirmed that high interest rates on mortgages hinder the development of housing lending.