I.L. KAVITSKAYA
Candidate of Economics (PhD), Associate Professor of the Department of Macroeconomic Analysis, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2014, Vol. 12 (no. 4),

p. 52-58

The article presents an analysis of the impact of institutional features of the US economy to implement the practice of unconventional measures of monetary policy in the current crisis. Article researches the programs of unconventional monetary policy, which the Fed held before and after the collapse of the bank Lehman Brothers, systematized and compared the Fed’s actions during the crisis in the US at the different stages. A detailed study of the programs, which the Fed used to influence the economy in the crisis, shows a special character of these programs. On the one hand, it was definitely the adaptation of the measures applied to the current situation. On the other hand, the institutional features of the US financial market dictated the need for exposure on the certain sectors of the financial market, but not on the whole market.

M.V. KURBATOVA
Doctor of Economics (DSc), Professor, Head of the Department of Economic Theory and State Management, Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia

N.F. APARINA
Candidate of Economics (PhD), Associate Professor of the Department of Economic Theory and State Management, Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia

I.V. DONOVA
Senior Lecturer of the Department of Management, Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia

E.S. KAGAN
Candidate of Technical Sciences (PhD), Associate Professor of the Department of Automation Research and Technical Cybernetics, Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2014, Vol. 12 (no. 4),

p. 33-51

The higher education reform in Russian implements large-scale of documented rules that regulate university lecturers’ activity. Academic standards as predominantly informal norms are hustled away with formal rules that define the conditions of activity and create competition among lecturers. The consequences of the introduction of the mechanisms of university lecturers’ external evaluation into the Russian higher education are the object of this paper. An attempt is made to evaluate the level of the public formalization of the lecturers’ activity and determine whether there is any relation between this formalization and the public evaluation of the universities’ performance in the paper. The fulfilled research did not reveal any significant relationship between the level of the public formalization of the lecturers’ activity and the public evaluation of the universities’ performance. However, the unfolding processes of external control strengthening will have far-reaching consequences. Most likely, the consequences will be negative, so is unlikely to increase or to replace successfully academic standards in universities with any bureaucratic methods.

G.I. KHANIN
Doctor of Economics (DSc), Professor, Siberian Institute of Management – branch of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk, Russia

D.A. FOMIN
Candidate of Economics (PhD), Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2014, Vol. 12 (no. 4),

p. 15-32

Started in 2012, Russian economic crisis is seen as a natural result of previous development of Soviet Russian economies and societies. The dimensions of the crisis and the dynamics of the economy are analyzed using alternative assessments developed by the authors. Compared with the data provided by the Federal State Statistics Service of the Russian Federation, the authors’ estimates show much deeper fall of the Russian economy. The impact of the crisis on real economy, as well as the financial and foreign sectors, and the standard of living, are considered. We prove that the crisis’ nature is not cyclical, but systemic. Furthermore – the existing economic policy will provoke its protraction. Possible exit strategies are overviewed, their strengths and weaknesses are revealed.

O.Yu. MAMEDOV
Doctor of Economics (DSc), Professor, Head of the Department of Political Economy and Economic Policy, Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don,Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2014, Vol. 12 (no. 4),

p. 6-14

Economic crises not only compel to change monetary and structural anti-crisis technology, but as well give rise to special economic policy design, viewing the social-oriented strategy as the priority. The author reflects on the issues related to feasibility of Russian anti-crisis economic policy turning towards economic populism. The conclusion is made on the catastrophic consequences if such a turn occurs. The ideological nature of economic populism is revealed in the article, its historical origins are traced. Relations between the economic populism and hypertrophy of protectionist policies are detected by the author; anti-market, as well as budget-redistributive, orientation of the «economy of populism» are displayed. The article shows that the main arena where liberalism and populism are striving is the sphere of economy, including the principles of economy’s social organization. During the crisis period, as the author puts it, the Russian populism is an economy’s particularly dangerous enemy, given Communist ideology had been meeting the aspirations of the broad masses of lumpens towards rude equalizing for decades. If unfavorable events occur, the country can face all the consequences of panic-stricken populism, including its extreme forms that are well-known in human History.