SFeDu
of.211, Gorgoko St., 88 
Rostov-on-Don
Russia
344002
+7 (863) 250-59-54
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
te@sfedu.ru

TERRA ECONOMICUS

  • Home
  • Issues
  • 2023
  • No 4
  • Comparing the approaches to state regulation of foreign trade (The case of Russia after the Crimean War and the United States after the Civil War)

Comparing the approaches to state regulation of foreign trade (The case of Russia after the Crimean War and the United States after the Civil War)


TERRA ECONOMICUS, , Vol. 21 (no. 4),

The post-war economy in any country and in any historical era faces a relatively standard set of consequences (burden on the state budget, inflation, etc.). Examples of state regulation of foreign trade in Russia after the Crimean War and in the United States after the Civil War are interesting both in the opposite direction and, as a result, in the opposite results. For an economist, such a comparison is also interesting because these two wars take place in close periods of time and the chronological framework for studying the recovery of the economies of the two countries after the wars is also close, thereby defining the external factors of economic development as ceteris paribus. The purpose of the article is to compare the results of state regulation of foreign trade in Russia during the twenty years after the end of the Crimean War (from 1856 to 1876) and in the USA during the twelve years after the end of the Civil War (from 1865 to 1876). In achieving research objectives, traditional economic history methods were used: problem-chronological, systemic, comparativehistorical. A world systems approach was also used to analyze the causes of war in both countries. Comparison of approaches to the state regulation of foreign trade in Russia and in the United States in the second half of the 19th century shows that the U.S. implemented a foreign trade regulation policy aimed at maintaining and protecting domestic industry, which led to economic growth and an increase in the welfare of the population. But in Russia, the policy of foreign trade adhered to a greater extent to free trading and the emphasis in state regulation was placed on monetary methods.
Citation: Epifanova N.S. (2023). Comparing the approaches to state regulation of foreign trade (The case of Russia after the Crimean War and the United States after the Civil War). Terra Economicus 21(4), 80–90 (in Russian). DOI: 10.18522/2073-6606-2023-21-4-80-90


Keywords: history of foreign trade; Crimean War; American Civil War; international trade

JEL codes: N10, F13

References:
  • Валлерстайн И. (2001). Анализ мировых систем и ситуация в современном мире. СПб.: Университетская книга. [Wallerstein, I. (2001). Analysis of World Systems and the Situation in Modern World. St. Petersburg: University Book Publ. (in Russian)].
  • Вессель Н. (1885). Нормальный государственный бюджет. Русский вестник 2(1), 377–445.[Wessel, N. (1885). Normal state budget. Russian Bulletin 2(1), 377–445 (in Russian)].
  • Глазьев С.Ю. (2015). Нищета и блеск российских монетаристов. Часть 1. Экономическая наука современной России (2), 7–21. [Glazyev, S. (2015). Poverty and splendor of Russian monetarists. Part 1. Economic Science of Modern Russia (2), 7–21 (in Russian)].
  • Красильников А. (1882). Объяснение причин успехов Америки и неуспеха России в восстановлении металлического обращения. СПб. [Krasilnikov, A. (1882). Explanation of America’s Success and Russia’s Failure in the Restoration of Metallic Coins Circulation. St. Petersburg (in Russian)].
  • Мукхопадхьяй А. (2019). Изменения в международной торговле в условиях нестабильного миропорядка. Вестник международных организаций: образование, наука, новая экономика 14(4), 89–111. [Mukhopadhyay, A. (2019). Changes in international trade in an unstable world order. Bulletin of International Organizations: Education, Science, New Economics 14(4), 89–111 (in Russian)].
  • Нефедов С.А. (2022). Экономическая политика и железнодорожное строительство в правление Александра II (1855–1865). Известия Уральского федерального университета. Серия 2: Гуманитарные науки 24(1), 165–180. [Nefedov, S. (2022). Economic policy and railway construction during the reign of Alexander II (1855–1865). Bulletin of the Ural Federal University. Series 2: Humanities 24(1), 165–180 (in Russian)]. DOI: 10.15826/izv2.2022.24.1.011
  • Нифонтов А.С. (1972). Хозяйственная конъюнктура в России во второй половине XIX века. История СССР (3), 42–64. [Nifontov, A. (1972). Economic situation in Russia in the second half of the XIX century. History of the USSR (3), 42–64 (in Russian)].
  • Орлов А.А. (2019). Великобритания, Россия и проблема нового мирового порядка в европейской политике первой половины XIX века (1815–1854 гг.). М.: МГПУ. [Orlov, A. (2019). Great Britain, Russia, and the Problem of the New World Order in European Politics in the First Half of the 19th Century (1815–1854). Moscow: Moscow City University Publ. (in Russian)].
  • Пигу А.К. (1924). Политическая экономия войны. Л.: Военное издательство Ленинградского военного округа. [Pigou, A. (1924). Political Economy of War. Leningrad: Military Publishing House of the Leningrad Military District (in Russian)].
  • Покровский С.А. (1947). Внешняя торговля и торговая политика России. М. [Pokrovsky, S.(1947). Foreign Trade and Trade Policy of Russia (in Russian)].
  • Святловский Е. (1926). Экономика войны. М. [Svyatlovsky, E. (1926). Economics of War. Moscow: Military Bulletin Publ. (in Russian)].
  • Степанов В.Л. (2018). Крымская война и экономика России. Вопросы теоретической экономики(1), 117–137. [Stepanov, V. (2018). The Crimean War and the Russian economy. Issues of Economic Theory (1), 117–137 (in Russian)]. DOI: 10.24411/2587-7666-2018-00008
  • Тарле Е.В. (2023). Крымская война: В 2 т. Т. 1. М.: Юрайт. [Tarle, E. (2023). Crimean War: In 2 vols. Vol. 1. Moscow: Yurait Publishing House (in Russian)].
  • Хатыпова А., Тишаков А. (2011). Роль госдолга США в мировом движении капитала. Мировое и национальное хозяйство (4), 73–84. [Khatypova, A., Tishakov, A. (2011). The role of the US public debt in the global movement of capital. World and National Economy (4), 73–84 (in Russian)].
  • Шевченко М.М. (2007). Историческое значение политической системы императора Николая I: новая точка зрения. Труды ГИМ: XIX век в истории России. Современные концепции истории России XIX века и их музейные интерпретации (163). М.: ГИМ, с. 281–302. [Shevchenko, M.(2007). The historical significance of the political system of Emperor Nicholas I: A new perspective. Proceedings of the State Historical Museum: 19th century in the history of Russia. Modern concepts of the history of Russia in the 19th century and their museum interpretation (163). Moscow: State Historical Museum Publ., pp. 281–302 (in Russian)].
  • Goldin, C., Lewis, F. (1975). The economic cost of the American Civil War: Estimates and implications. Journal of Economic History 35(2), 299–326.
  • Higgs, R. (1971). The Transformation of the American Economy: An Essay in Interpretation. Mises Institute.
  • Irwin, D. (2020a). Trade policy in American economic history. Annual Review of Economics 12, 23–44.
  • Irwin, D. (2000b). Could the U.S. iron industry have survived free trade after the Civil War? Explorations in Economic History 37, 278–299.
  • Mitchell, W. (1987). Greenbacks and the cost of the Civil War. Journal of Political Economy 5(2), 117–156.
Publisher: Southern Federal University
Founder: Southern Federal University
ISSN: 2073-6606