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.

The primary task for political economy of socialism was to elaborate a project of the new society. Looking forward into the future, that is positioning beyond current reality, was its mission, not a flaw, for which it is routinely blamed. At the same time, the future socialist society was thought through negation of capitalism as a system based on private property. Therefore, the theme of ownership was at the centre of the socialist project. Creating specific type of discourse was its component part. Sophistication in mastering its rules was a prerequisite of meaningful communication within this discourse. That’s why the texts as artifacts of this discourse need to be deciphered today. In this paper, dealing with the history of Soviet economic debates about ownership, it is attempted to reveal most relevant, even if often implicit, meanings which leading Soviet political economists were aiming to express in their works. The authors analyse historical background of the Soviet ownership discourse, its formation in the early Soviet, as well as in Stalin’s periods, competing research programmes of its transformation in the 1960s and 1970s, and its breakup at the turn of the 1990s.

The paper analyzes the metaphor of “an invisible hand”, which was introduced two and a half centuries ago by Adam Smith (1723—1790) and which eventually became the central concept of modern economics. Its first part presents a detailed textual analysis of three fragments from Smith’s works where it is discussed — in the posthumously published “The history of astronomy” (1796), “The theory of moral sentiments” (1757) and “The wealth of nations” (1776). A question arises what meaning Smith put into his metaphor and what significance he attached to it — was there some important general idea behind it or was it merely a passing rhetoric device? There is also no consensus among historians of economic thought what interpretation is more correct — theological (in this case, the “invisible hand” is attributed to the Divine Providence directing it) or secular (in this case, it acts autonomously, without control from any external powers). In addition to “an invisible hand”, we also find in Smith’s texts “the visible hand” of the state, and he leaves no doubt on whose side his sympathies are.

In recent decades, predicting turning points of economic cycles (their peaks and troughs) using leading indicators has established itself as a fairly simple, clear and at the same time reliable method. But the world experience has shown that any system of leading indicators requires revision and clarification from time to time. The recent non-economic shocks experienced by the Russian economy have made urgent a full-scale revision of existing leading indicators. The article proposes a methodology for constructing a new index, which, one may hope, will not have the shortcomings of its predecessors. In the process of its construction, the dating of the peaks and troughs associated with previous recessions in the Russian economy was specified; the peculiarities of the cyclical dynamics of several dozens of time series were re-examined. The eight most promising indicators were aggregated into a composite leading indicator (CLI) using two alternative methods; we have chosen the one which is not only easier to use and update, but, apparently, with better predictive properties.

Taking China’s economy as an example, some macroeconomic characteristics of the new economic world order, which ensure GDP growth rate ahead of the US, acceleration of innovation activity and growing influence on the structure of global finances are considered. Attention is drawn to the little-studied effect generated by the difference in financing fixed capital investment: while in China the direct use of budgetary resources for that purpose plays a major role, in the United States the indirect use of similar resources dominates. As a result, there is a lag effect, which allows China (given equal rates of the issue of money) generate a higher growth rate and lower inflation. It is shown that in Russia in 2023—2025 no changes towards China’s macroeconomic characteristics are expected. One reason lies in selective attitude of monetary authorities to the economic theory. First, the hypothesis of the neutrality of money in the long term still prevails. With the help of the shifting mode of reproduction model it is shown that this hypothesis is incorrect: in the long run, money can be both neutral and non-neutral, what matters is how a single cash flow is distributed between investment activities and the production and consumption of non-productive goods. Therefore, the possibility of switching to a policy of monetary stimulation of economic growth is ignored. Second, the macroeconomic theory of managing the transitional processes arising from a sharp acceleration in the rate of GDP is insufficiently developed. Calculations of nonstationary trajectories of GDP rates and inflation have been made, as well as ways to minimize the duration of the transition process and to mitigate inflationary fluctuations have been developed. This largely removes the problem of uncertainty in the transition process, and also makes it possible to control it. As a result, it is possible to transit to accelerated economic growth in Russia.

The climate change and deterioration of nature appear to be global problems, and the efficiency of solving them depends on the level of decarbonizing countries’ and regions’ economies. Siberia and Scandinavia are relevant megaregions with similar natural, climate, economic and energy characteristics, though demonstrat­ing, in many cases, different patterns of decarbonizing. The accomplished compara­tive analysis has confirmed that the differences have been conditioned by different approaches to the process of decarbonization. Low-carbon vector of Siberia suggests counterbalance of total GHG, owing to CO₂ reduction and its removal with purpose to achieve carbon-neutrality by 2060. In Scandinavia reaching net-zero emission by 2050 suggests the compensation of only residual emission of GHG and only thanks to reliable removal and sequestration technologies. Differences depend on prices and values that refer to the energy sector as a prime emitter in both megaregions. In Siberia the focus is on the evolutionary, gradual energy transition from coal to natural gas, considering that fossil fuels are cheap, available, subsidized by state, and supported by the modernization activities of energy companies, which are led by principals of security, stability and profitability. Scandinavia megaregion seems to prefer the approach to electrifying economy with renewables. Such choice has been determined not only by the price-fall of renewables, but also by the growth of their value on behalf of long-term, innovative activities of energy companies, active role of the states with the purpose of reaching the common good.

Business elites of different countries use business aviation to move around the planet. Its development pattern reflects the peculiarities of business elites. The most important parameters of business aviation activity are the number of business jets registered, the number of their departures, as well as the routing of departures. Business aviation is used mainly for domestic flights in most large countries. Russia is an exception — notwithstanding its enormous size and underdeveloped high-speed railroads, Russian business jets are mostly used to fly abroad, mainly to Western European countries. That means that the Russian business elite is more cosmopolitan in its interests, lifestyle and outlook than business elites of many other countries. The distribution of internal activity of business aviation is an important indicator of its development. Many countries have this activity more or less evenly distributed throughout their territory. In contrast, business aviation activity in Russia is concentrated in a few large cities, primarily in Moscow.