Julian DÖRR
PhD, Officer for Digitalization, German Association of Family Owned Enterprises DIE FAMILIENUNTERNEHMER e.V., Berlin, Germany

Olaf KOWALSKI
Mag. iur., Researcher and Coordinator, Research Center on Normative Foundations of Society, Institute of Public Law – Department of Constitutional Law, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany

Sergey I. NEVSKIY
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 6-22
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-6-22

Since Satoshi Nakamoto’s invention of Bitcoin in 2008, as a reaction to the global financial crisis, discussions about the theoretical and applied value of the innovative decentralized and private money – «cryptocurrencies» – have come a long way. The breakthrough blockchain technology and the prospects for its application attract more and more attention of specialists and the general public, associated with the formation of fundamentally new outlines of a globally integrated and high-tech digital economic system. At the same time, the idea of Bitcoin itself is more likely to cause cautious reactions and fears, primarily from governments and regulatory authorities, which see the spread of cryptographic currencies as a challenge to traditional monetary institutions, including the state monopoly on money. The authors of the article reflect on the problems of cryptocurrency market regulation in the context of this public discourse, which is taking place against the background of growing discontent with respect to the traditional institutions of the monetary and financial system. The official positions of the financial authorities on the development of the «cryptocurrency industry» are discussed. The European – namely, German – experience of regulation of the sphere of cryptocurrency circulation is presented. It is noted that Russian experience differs from that of a number of foreign countries, in which certain approaches to civil law interpretation and the development of adapted norms and rules for interacting with cryptocurrencies have already been formed. Russia still lacks any legal definition as well as clear legislative regulation of cryptocurrencies. The cautious position of Russian regulators is determined by the need for a more thorough study of the economic and legal nature of private digital means of payment in order to prevent risks of financial losses for consumers and eliminate possible threats to the stability of the financial and economic system as a whole. An appeal to the late legacy of Friedrich August von Hayek and his ideas regarding the denationalization of monetary systems will help to clarify the potential dynamics of this situation.

Citation: Dörr, J., Kowalski, O., Nevskiy, S. I. (2019). Digitalization and monetary order: problems and prospects of cryptocurrency market regulation. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 6–22. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-6-22

Victor E. DEMENTIEV
Doct. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Leading Staff Scientist, Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Professor, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Moscow, Russia

Sergey G. EVSUKOV
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Research Associate, Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Аssociate Professor, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Moscow, Russia

Elena V. USTYUZHANINA
Doct. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics; Leading Staff Scientist, Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 23-40
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-23-40

The paper discusses economic efficiency of mutual aid between competitors in markets for network goods while attaining the critical mass of consumers. Another aspect of reciprocity analyzed in the paper is the supply of free light versions of a good in order to gain loyalty of customers and attract their interest in more advanced versions. Two types of vertical differentiation of network goods are examined: the real one based on the amount of options offered to consumers, and the phantom one – the artificial division of goods into the upmarket category and the normal one. The research method is mathematical modeling. Various formulas are used to describe links between the consumer value of a good and the number of its consumers; between the demanded quantity of a good and its price level; between the distribution of total quantity demanded among competitors and their prices/price elasticity of demand; between the velocity of achieving maximum economic benefit and prices as well as marketing strategies of suppliers. Computer experiments have been used to analyze the role of reciprocity between competitors in achieving such goals as: maximization of net present value of network goods suppliers, minimization of discounted payback period and minimization of period needed to achieve the maximum net present value. The last two goals are essential when new competitors are likely to enter the market. The authors of the paper evaluate the importance of such tools as versioning (supply of light and advanced versions of a good), cooperative strategy of moderately high prices as well as cooperative phantom differentiation when the risk of appearance of new competitors is high.

Citation: Dementiev, V. E., Evsukov, S. G., Ustyuzhanina, E. V. (2019). Reciprocity in emerging markets for network goods. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 23–40. DOI: 10.23683/20736606-2019-17-4-23-40

Alexandr V. SHMAKOV
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management, Novosibirsk, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 41-61
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-41-61

This article discusses the effects of changing the code of ritual behavior. The digital transformation of the economy leads to a change in the rules of behavior. Changes in these rules have a significant impact on the people’s quality of life and other economic indicators. New rules of behavior, new rituals of interpersonal communication should be fixed in new institutions. Unfortunately, modern economic and sociological methods make it impossible to estimate the effects of changes in the code of ritual behavior. However, we should conduct such estimation to regulate digital transformation processes. In the first section of this article, the author suggests the definition of a ritual of profane culture. It is noted that rituals are pragmatic. The author analyzed the sociological functions of rituals and concluded that the main economic function of rituals is to reduce the transaction costs of interpersonal communication. He proposes to estimate how interpersonal rituals save transaction costs and, on this basis, makes a conclusion about the level of their effectiveness. It is necessary to specify the composition of transaction costs in order to estimate the effectiveness of rituals in this way. Transaction costs are divided into procedural transaction costs and behavioral transaction costs. Procedural transaction costs are classified according to the type of transaction. The classification of behavioral transaction costs is based on the types of personality adaptation. Behavioral transaction costs are divided into intrapersonal and interpersonal transaction costs.

Citation: Shmakov, A. V. (2019). Code of ritual behavior in the context of digital transformation of economy. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 41–61. DOI: 10.23683/2073-66062019-17-4-41-61

Danila E. RASKOV
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor, St. Petersburg State University; Senior Researcher, Laboratory of Actual History, RANEPA, Moscow, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 62-79
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-62-79

Cameralism as a doctrine and practice corresponds to the era of mercantilism – the 16th–18th centuries – the period when economic thought ceased to be medieval but has not yet become political economy. Recently, this direction in economic thought, the corps of texts about the art and science of management and economics, have become more actively revised and updated. The subject of the article is the translation into Russian in the second half of the 18th century of the books of the most famous cameralist of this period – Johann Heinrich Gottlob von Justi (1717–1771). Revealed translations of Justi on cameral and police sciences, on industry development form a vast array of texts of more than three thousand pages. Justy is the most translated Russian economist of the 18th century, and it was also possible to show that not French, but Russian translations turned out to be the hugest for Justi himself. In addition to comparing the texts with the originals, identifying the terminological strategy of the translators and paying close attention to any abbreviations, additions and introductions, special attention was paid to finding information about the translators themselves, about the circumstances associated with the organization and payment of the translation. Books were prepared at two major academic centers – Moscow University and St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. Their translation was distinguished, with rare exceptions, by its completeness and literalism. Basically, they lacked scientific elaboration, i.e. they were only translations without controversy, informative forewords and additions. Large circulations and a luxurious type of publication indicated that they were oriented towards the general public and carried out the symbolic function of “enlightenment”. The term Policei shows the strategy of translators who rightly tried to give the “police” a broader meaning and translated as good order, good organization and good morals, which made the translation text even more normative.

Citation: Raskov, D. E. (2019). Cameralism of books: Justi’s translations in the eighteenth-century Russia. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 62–79. DOI: 10.23683/2073-66062019-17-4-62-79

Irina G. CHAPLYGINA
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 80-94
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-80-94

The main purpose of this article is to investigate the impact of European cameralism on the development of Russian economic science and education in the 18th century. Cameralism as a Science of the State or Science of Regulation was a response to the profound political changes provoked by the Thirty Years War and Peace of Westphalia as well as by the process of secularization. Young national states developed the idea of civil and economic regulation as a main source of its power and sovereignty. This new political strategy demanded a new type of economic knowledge – applied, pragmatic, and practical-oriented. As a result, new cameral sciences demonstrated few distinctive features: the emphasis on collecting data of national economy, the practical focus of research, the methodological and disciplinary eclectics as well as the growth of the publicity of academic activity. Thus, the investigation of the Russian economic thought and education of 18th century is aimed to discover common features with European cameral tendencies. In this period, “economy” designated the practical application of any scientific knowledge in order to rationalize the economic life of the state. As a result, natural sciences played the notable role in the development of economic science. The structure of the courses of Moscow University from 1755 to 1804 did show that economic disciplines are represented at all three faculties, – Philosophy, Law and Medicine. Even after the department of political economy was established in 1804, this disciplinary disunity tended to persist.

Citation: Chaplygina, I. G. (2019). Cameralism and economic disciplines in the eighteenth-century Moscow University. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 80–94. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-80-94

Alexander N. DUBYANSKY
Doct. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Saint-Petersburg State University, Saint-Petersburg, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 95-112
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-95-112

The paper deals with the history of economic thought of Russia and the domestic economic history of the early XIX century. The subject of study in this paper is the economic policy of the Minister of Finance of Russia E.F. Cancrin. The author’s purpose is to prove the hypothesis that the Minister of Finance was a supporter of the economic doctrine of cameralism. At the same time, the article focuses not on the economic views of Cancrin, but on the analysis of activities through which he implemented his policies. This approach appears rather new to investigate the economic policy of this outstanding political figure during the reign of Alexander I and Nicholas I. In early XIX century, there was a unique situation in Russia, namely parallel money circulation with two equal currencies, banknotes and silver coins, simultaneously operated; exchange rate between them was established on the stock exchange. On the one hand, the parallel circulation destabilized the monetary economy of the country, but on the other, contributed to the replenishment of the state Treasury with the necessary funds in precious metals. It is the advantage of dual circulation to finance the budget prevented Cancrin from eliminating this unconventional phenomenon. His actions were guided more by practical considerations than by the theoretical patterns popular at the time. This policy met the criteria of cameralism. The spirit of cameralism corresponded to the policy of protectionism, the supporter of which was Cancrin. All this allows the author to conclude that Cancrin was a cameralist.

Citation: Dubyansky, A. N. (2019). Ideas of cameralism in economic policy of Cancrin. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 95–112. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-95-112

Gregory G. POPOV
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Assistant Professor, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), Moscow, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 113-128
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-113-128

The paper deals with the Soviet economy from the perspective of two contrasting models of the national economy, shaped under different types of political regimes. The author discusses the differences between the economic system under Stalinʼs dictatorship and post-Stalin moderate Communist regime. The main reasons why Stalinism has run its course in the early 1950s are analyzed. Short-term, but quite effective liberal (as far as it was possible under Soviet regime) reforms put forward by Georgy Malenkov, 1953–1955, are discussed. As opposed to Malenkov’s reforms, Nikita Khrushchevʼs technocratic course to transform the Soviet economy is analyzed. The latter implied extensive economic growth, with the massive investments into advanced technology, and public administration reforms. The author argues that Khrushchevʼs technocratic policy, despite its failures, is undervalued by the Russian historiographers (in particular, much has been done for housing construction and energy industry). Meanwhile, Khrushchevʼs reforms neglected the issue of return on investment, and eventually resulted in over-investment crisis of the Soviet economy and failure of the Khrushchev Thaw. Relying on still insufficiently studied historical sources, the author focuses on the role of Soviet economists in policy «shifts» which took place in 1950s.

Citation: Popov, G. G. (2019). Between the liberalization of communism and orthodox marxism (understanding evolution of soviet economic development in the 1950s and 1960s). Terra Economicus, 17(4), 113–128. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-113-128

Svetlana V. OREKHOVA
Doct. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor, Ural State University of Economics, Ekaterinburg, Russia

Evgeniy V. KISLITSYN
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Senior Lecturer, Ural State University of Economics, Ekaterinburg, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 129-147
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-129-147

The choice of priorities of state structural policy is most often linked to the definition of proportions between industry markets. At the same time, analysis of intra-industrial structural changes can provide additional information about the sources and factors of economic growth. As the authors suggest, small business in Russia is not a driver for economic development. The research method is based on a comparative analysis of the mass, index and rate of structural changes of small businesses compared to the industry as a whole. The assessment was carried out in the context of three groups of indicators: revenue, the average number of employees and investments in fixed capital of enterprises. The information base of the study consisted of data on enterprises of ten sectors of industry from 2005 to 2017. The research findings confirm the industry heterogeneity between small and other industrial enterprises. First, the rate of change in revenue for the period under study for small businesses is significantly different from the General trends in industry. Second, structural changes in the number of employees and investment in fixed assets confirm the fact that small business is growing much slower than the industry as a whole. Third, Pearson’s assessment of the correlation between the structural change index and profitability of sales showed that the increase in output (revenue) and investment in fixed assets leads to a decrease in the efficiency of small industrial enterprises. The proposed work provides grounds for further research in the field of assessing the effectiveness of structural industrial policy and behavior of small enterprises in Russia.

Citation: Orekhova, S. V., Kislitsyn, E. V. (2019). Small business and structural changes in industry. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 129–147. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-129-147

Elena V. MIKHALKINA
Doct. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia

Lyudmila S. SKACHKOVA
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor, Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia

Olga Y. GERASIMOVA
Senior Lecturer, Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia

TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2019, Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 148-173
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-148-173

The paper deals with the choice of career strategies by recent graduates and the forces affecting it. Our research interests stem from the evidence showing a continuous decrease in the number of the postgraduate and doctoral thesis defences in Russia, a decline in the quality of training programs for highly qualified personnel, as well as the new standards for postgraduate and doctoral education which imply the optionality of the thesis defence. The theoretical and conceptual framework of the study relies upon the approaches of Russian and foreign researchers to the problem of human capital reproduction in higher education. Sample survey data were collected through questionnaires to gather information from the respondents – 1429 graduate students from 5 federal universities: Kazan (Volga region) Federal University, Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M. V. Lomonosov, North-Caucasus Federal University, Siberian Federal University, Southern Federal University. Data analysis helped to identify the portrait of the Russian graduate student characterized by traits such as the motivational value of the career path, employment, importance of defending the thesis, plans after graduation, motives and incentives that are important in the workplace, factors that affect student retention in higher education. Four clusters were identified and compared with each other through the k-means clustering (relying on the respondents’ opinions on the «motivation for entering postgraduate programs»). Overall, our findings suggest four career strategies in the academic and non-academic labor markets as follows: researcher/freelance researcher; a strategy of academic inbreeding; a strategy of «undecided»; and that of the inbreeding careerist. Meanwhile, several features exist, which are common for all postgraduates, including the research activity as one of the highest priorities, the most important life goals, work motivation, and importance of the financial component.

Citation: Mikhalkina, E. V., Skachkova, L. S., Gerasimova, O. Y. (2019). Academic or non-academic career: what choice do graduates of federal universities make? Terra Economicus, 17(4), 148–173. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-148-173

Zeynegul SAMAIBEKOVA
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Assistant Professor, Kyrgyz State University of Construction Transport and Architecture named after N. Isanov, Kyrgyz Republic, Bishkek

Sami Salih Masud ZAID
Doctoral Student, Kyrgyz-Russian Slavic University, Kyrgyz Republic, Bishkek

Alla MOLCHANOVA
Cand. Sci. (Pedagogy), Associate Professor, Moscow Psychologic-Social University, Moscow, Russian Federation

Anna RYBAKOVA
Cand. Sci. (Psychology), Associate Professor, Russian State Social University, Moscow, Russian Federation

TERRA ECONOMICUS, , Vol. 17 (no. 4),

p. 174-189
DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-174-189

This paper focuses on the management and steering the intellectual potential in the system of vocational and higher education institutions (HEIs). It is quite apparent that more advanced intellectual potential in the system of higher education helps to improve the system’s viability, competitiveness, and to increase its overall quality thus making a considerable contribution to the building the overall intellectual potential of a given country. Moreover, we argue that intellectual potential is important for building intellectual or human capital which is crucial for the economic and social development. The paper tackles the institutional building of the intellectual potential in higher education. In particular, it shows that the intellectual potential of HEIs represents a holistic system of all combined potentials of students, lecturers, employees, as well as the university administration. We focus on the issues of building intellectual capital in higher education, institutional building in science and education, management of the scientific educational networks, and innovative process management in educational institutions. Our conclusions show that intellectual potential provides a more accurate blueprint for the future growth path. Furthermore, intellectual potential and its key components and indicators are capable of providing a clear view of the most important prerequisites for development. We argue that HEIs and universities in all countries around the world should focus on investing in building the human capital and intellectual potential. It is also important to identity the key areas and strategies for supporting and managing intellectual potential and to provide targeted support into the most promising areas that can achieve fastest growth.

Citation: Samaibekova, Z., Zaid, S. S. M., Molchanova, A., Rybakova, A. (2019). Managing the intellectual potential in the higher education system. Terra Economicus, 17(4), 174–189. DOI: 10.23683/2073-6606-2019-17-4-174-189