Institutionalism and neoclassical economics

Institute concept. The role of institutions in the functioning of the economy

We begin our study of institutions with the etymology of the word institute.

to institute (English) - to install, establish.

The concept of the institution was borrowed by economists from the social sciences, in particular from sociology.

The Institute is called a set of roles and statuses designed to meet a specific need.

Definitions of institutions can also be found in works on political philosophy and social psychology. For example, the category of institution is one of the central in the work of John Rawls "Theory of Justice".

Under institutes I will understand the public system of rules that define office and position with corresponding rights and responsibilities, power and immunity, and the like. These rules specify certain forms of action as permitted and others as prohibited, punishing certain actions and protecting others when violence occurs. As examples, or more general social practices, we can cite games, rituals, courts and parliaments, markets and property systems.

In economic theory, the concept of an institution was first included in the analysis by Thorstein Veblen.

Institutions- it is, in fact, a widespread way of thinking with regard to the individual relations between society and the individual and the individual functions they perform; and the system of society's life, which is made up of the totality of those acting at a certain time or at any moment in the development of any society, can, from the psychological point of view, be characterized in general terms as a prevailing spiritual position or a widespread idea of ​​the way of life in society.

Veblen also understood by institutions:

• habitual ways of responding to stimuli;
• the structure of the production or economic mechanism;
• the currently accepted system of social life.

Another founder of institutionalism, John Commons, defines the institution as follows:

Institute- collective action to control, release and expand individual action.

Another classic of institutionalism, Wesley Mitchell, has the following definition:

Institutions are dominant and highly standardized social habits.

Currently, within the framework of modern institutionalism, the most common is the interpretation of the institutions of Douglas North:

Institutions are rules, mechanisms that enforce them, and norms of behavior that structure repetitive interactions between people.

The economic actions of an individual do not take place in an isolated space, but in a certain society. And therefore it is of great importance how the society will react to them. Thus, transactions that are acceptable and profitable in one location may not necessarily be worthwhile even under similar conditions elsewhere. An example of this is the restrictions imposed on the economic behavior of a person by various religious cults.

In order to avoid the coordination of many external factors influencing success and the very possibility of making a particular decision, within the framework of the economic and social orders, schemes or algorithms of behavior are developed that are most effective under these conditions. These schemes and algorithms or matrices of the behavior of individuals are nothing more than institutions.

There are several reasons why neoclassical theory (of the early 60s) ceased to meet the requirements imposed on it by economists who tried to comprehend the real events in modern economic practice:

1. Neoclassical theory is based on unrealistic assumptions and constraints, and, therefore, it uses models that are inadequate to economic practice. Coase called this state of affairs in neoclassicism "chalkboard economics."
2. Economics expands the range of phenomena (for example, such as ideology, law, norms of behavior, family) that can be successfully analyzed from the point of view of economics. This process was called "economic imperialism". The leading representative of this direction is the Nobel laureate Harry Becker. But for the first time, Ludwig von Mises wrote about the need to create a general science studying human action, who proposed the term "praxeology" for this.
3. Within the framework of neoclassicism, there are practically no theories that satisfactorily explain the dynamic changes in the economy, the importance of studying, which became relevant against the background of the historical events of the 20th century. (In general, within the framework of economic science until the 1980s, this problem was considered almost exclusively within the framework of Marxist political economy).

Now let's dwell on the basic premises of neoclassical theory, which constitute its paradigm (rigid core), as well as the "protective belt", following the methodology of science put forward by Imre Lakatos:

Hard core :

1. stable preferences that are endogenous;
2. rational choice (maximizing behavior);
3. market equilibrium and general equilibrium in all markets.

Protective belt:

1. Ownership rights remain unchanged and clearly defined;
2. The information is completely accessible and complete;
3. Individuals satisfy their needs through an exchange that takes place without cost, taking into account the initial distribution.

The Lakatos research program, while leaving the rigid core intact, should be aimed at clarifying, developing existing or proposing new auxiliary hypotheses that form a protective belt around this core.

If the rigid core is modified, then the theory is replaced by a new theory with its own research program.

Consider how the premises of neoinstitutionalism and classical old institutionalism affect the research agenda of neoclassicism.

The "old" institutionalism, as an economic trend, emerged at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. It was closely associated with the historical direction in economic theory, with the so-called historical and new historical school (Liszt F., Schmoler G., Bretano L., Bucher K.). From the very beginning of its development, institutionalism was characterized by the upholding of the idea of ​​social control and the intervention of society, mainly the state, in economic processes. This was the legacy of the historical school, whose representatives not only denied the existence of stable deterministic relationships and laws in the economy, but also advocated the idea that the welfare of society could be achieved on the basis of strict state regulation of the economy of a nationalist persuasion.

The most prominent representatives of the "Old Institutionalism" are: Thorstein Veblen, John Commons, Wesley Mitchell, John Galbraith. Despite a significant range of problems covered in the works of these economists, they did not manage to form their own unified research program. As Coase noted, the work of the American institutionalists led nowhere because they lacked the theory to organize the mass of descriptive material.

The old institutionalism criticized the provisions that make up the "hard core of neoclassicism." In particular, Veblen rejected the concept of rationality and the corresponding maximization principle as fundamental in explaining the behavior of economic agents. The object of analysis is institutions, not human interactions in a space with limitations imposed by institutions.

Also, the works of the old institutionalists are distinguished by significant interdisciplinarity, being, in fact, a continuation of sociological, legal, statistical research in their application to economic problems.

The predecessors of neoinstitutionalism are the economists of the Austrian school, in particular Karl Menger and Friedrich von Hayek, who introduced the evolutionary method to economics, and also raised the question of the synthesis of many sciences studying society.

Modern neoinstitutionalism has its origins in the pioneering works of Ronald Coase "The Nature of the Firm", "The Problem of Social Costs."

The neo-institutionalists attacked in the first place the provisions of neoclassicism, which constitute its defensive core.

1. First, the premise that exchange occurs without cost has been criticized. A criticism of this position can be found in the early works of Coase. Although, it should be noted that Menger wrote about the possibility of the existence of exchange costs and their influence on the decisions of the exchanging subjects in his "Foundations of Political Economy".
   Economic exchange occurs only when each of its participants, carrying out the act of exchange, receives some increase in value to the value of the existing set of goods. This is proved by Karl Menger in his work "Foundations of Political Economy", proceeding from the assumption of the existence of two participants in the exchange. The first has a good A with a value of W, and the second has a good B with the same value W. As a result of the exchange that took place between them, the value of goods at the disposal of the first will be W + x, and the second - W + y. From this we can conclude that in the process of exchange, the value of the good for each participant increased by a certain amount. This example shows that the activity associated with exchange is not a waste of time and resources, but the same productive activity as the production of material goods.
   While exploring exchange, one cannot but dwell on the limits of exchange. The exchange will take place as long as the value of the goods at the disposal of each participant in the exchange will be, according to his estimates, less than the value of those goods that can be obtained as a result of the exchange. This thesis is true for all exchange counterparties. Using the symbols of the above example, the exchange occurs if W (A)< W + х для первого и W (B) < W + у для второго участников обмена, или если х > 0 and y > 0.
   So far, we have viewed exchange as a cost-free process. But in a real economy, any act of exchange is associated with certain costs. Such exchange costs are called transactional. They are usually interpreted as "the costs of collecting and processing information, the costs of negotiations and decision-making, the costs of control and legal protection of the execution of the contract."
   The concept of transaction costs contradicts the thesis of neoclassical theory that the costs of functioning of the market mechanism are equal to zero. This assumption made it possible not to take into account the influence of various institutions in the economic analysis. Therefore, if transaction costs are positive, it is necessary to take into account the influence of economic and social institutions on the functioning of the economic system.
2. Secondly, recognizing the existence of transaction costs, it becomes necessary to revise the thesis about the availability of information. The recognition of the thesis about the incompleteness and imperfection of information opens up new prospects for economic analysis, for example, in the study of contracts.
3. Third, the thesis of the neutrality of the distribution and specification of property rights has undergone a revision. Research in this direction served as a starting point for the development of such areas of institutionalism as the theory of property rights and the economics of organizations. Within the framework of these areas, subjects of economic activity “economic organizations have ceased to be regarded as“ black boxes ”.

Within the framework of "modern" institutionalism, attempts are also made to modify or even change the elements of the rigid core of neoclassicism. First of all, this is the premise of neoclassicism about rational choice. In institutional economics, classical rationality is modified by making assumptions about bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior.

Despite the differences, almost all representatives of neoinstitutionalism consider institutions through their influence on the decisions made by economic agents. In doing so, the following fundamental tools related to the human model are used: methodological individualism, utility maximization, bounded rationality, and opportunistic behavior.

Some representatives of modern institutionalism go even further and question the very premise of utility-maximizing behavior of the economic person, suggesting its replacement with the principle of satisfaction. In accordance with the classification of Tran Eggertsson, representatives of this direction form their own direction in institutionalism - the New Institutional Economy, representatives of which can be considered O. Williamson and G. Simon. Thus, the distinction between neoinstitutionalism and the new institutional economy can be drawn depending on which preconditions are subject to replacement or modification within their framework - the "hard core" or "protective belt".

The main representatives of neo-institutionalism are: R. Coase, O. Williamson, D. North, A. Alchian, Simon G., L. Thévenot, Menard K., Buchanan J., Olson M., R. Posner, G. Demsetz, S. Pejovich, T. Eggertsson et al.

The overwhelming majority of scientific research in the field of finance at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. did not concern the financial activities of enterprises - attention was focused on the systematization and generalization of methods for replenishing the state treasury through the tax system. This largely explains the fact that the theory of finance was very descriptive, and the corresponding monographs and textbooks were similar to each other like twins. Stability and, in a sense, stagnation in the development of financial science in its classical sense ended in the first third of the XX century. By this time, the classical theory of finance had practically exhausted itself, and new trends in the development of the economy inevitably led to a shift in emphasis in the fields of science and practice related to financial management. The fact is that on the eve of World War II and immediately after it, the situation in the world economy begins to change dramatically: as market relations develop, the role of the state and public unions in the economy is significantly reduced. The development and internationalization of capital markets, an increase in the role of transnational corporations, processes of concentration in the field of production, an increase in the importance of a financial resource as fundamental in the system of resource provision of any business led in the middle of the XX century. to the need for a theoretical understanding of the role of finance at the level of the main system-forming cell of any economic system, that is, at the level of an economic entity (firm).

Through the efforts of representatives of the Anglo-American school of finance, the theory of finance received an absolutely new content in comparison with the views of scientists of the 18th-19th centuries. With a certain degree of conditionality, it can be argued that within the framework of the classical theory of finance, centralized (or public) finance was developed and systematized. As for decentralized finance and financial relations with foreign countries, the actual relations and operations existed in those days, but there was no theoretical understanding and systematization of them. And only with the development of national and international financial markets and the strengthening of the influence of carriers of decentralized finance began to form a need for the conceptual foundations of the neoclassical theory of finance, the essence of which is to theoretically understand and substantiate the role and mechanisms of interaction between capital markets and the largest national and transnational corporations in international and national financial relations.

Forties and fifties of the twentieth century can be called the beginning of a fundamentally new stage in the development of financial science in the interpretation of its logic and content. It was during these years that the neoclassical theory of finance received its formalization, the essence of which lies in the theoretical understanding and substantiation of the role and mechanisms of interaction between capital markets and the largest national and transnational corporations in international and national financial relations.

By historical standards, the formation and development of the new theory proceeded at a fairly rapid pace; the main reason is the exceptional demand on the part of practice (development and internationalization of business, strengthening of financial markets, building up the banking sector, etc.). Already at the end of the 50s. XX century. thanks to the efforts of representatives of the Anglo-American school of finance, the new direction finally branched off from applied microeconomics and began to dominate financial science. Let us emphasize that the transition from the classical to the neoclassical theory of finance was not some unique, independent phenomenon - it was carried out within the framework of the formation of neoclassical economics and was theoretically supported by the developments of the leading representatives of a new direction - marginalism. The formation of neoclassical finance is associated with the evolution of economic theory and the formation of the neoclassical economic school, in particular, with the works of A. Marshall (neoclassical theory of marginalism), W. Jevons (theory of marginal utility), E. Boehm-Bawerk (theory of capital and the theory of interest).

With a certain degree of conditionality, it can be argued that the neoclassical theory of finance is based on four initial theses (premises):

 the economic power of the state, and therefore the stability of its financial system, is largely determined by the economic

the power of the private sector, the core of which is made up of large corporations;

• government interference in the activities of the private sector is minimized;

 from the available sources of financing that determine the development opportunities of large corporations, the main ones are profit and capital markets;

 internationalization of capital markets, goods, labor leads to the fact that the general trend in the development of financial systems of individual countries is the desire for integration.

All these theses are clearly confirmed in the current state and development trends of the global financial system. Thus, in relation to the latter thesis, in addition to the example of the creation of the European currency, the euro, one can also cite such a lesser known, but very significant fact, such as the adoption in 2000 of a basic set of accounting and reporting standards, which will be followed by all stock exchanges of the world; in other words, these standards will be used instead of national ones when preparing financial statements if the company intends to be listed on a reputable stock exchange.

In its most general form, the neoclassical theory of finance can be defined as a system of knowledge about the organization and management of the financial triad: resources, relationships, markets. The key sections that served as the basis for the formation of this science and / or its constituent parts were: utility theory, arbitrage pricing theory, theory of capital structure, portfolio theory and model pricing in the financial asset market (portfolio theory and capital asset pricing model), option pricing theory and state-preference theory.

If in the classical theory financial relations are limited to the study of patterns and the mechanism for the implementation of distribution processes, turning into a "thing in itself", then in the neoclassical interpretation there is a criterion for the productivity of distribution relations (the state of assets and liabilities of economic entities). As a result, the link between the objective category and the material world has been formalized, which is realized through various combinations of two typical financial procedures - mobilization and investment.

In the classical and neoclassical theories of finance, the composition of financial resources is fundamentally different. The classical definition is based on the results of reproduction of a product, when financial resources are understood as monetary incomes, receipts and savings generated by business entities and the state and intended for the purpose of expanded reproduction, material incentives for workers, meeting social needs and financing public expenditures.

In neoclassical theory, the nature of financial resources is investigated in the context of their role in ensuring the continuity of the reproductive process, that is, in the unity of two typical processes: 1) finding and mobilizing funding sources and 2) determining the directions and volumes of investment of borrowed funds. In other words, assets are called financial resources, with the help of which business entities solve investment and financial problems. In the definition of financial resources, the monetary nature of finance is supplanted by their value characteristic, which will find a logical continuation in identifying the essence and composition of financial instruments.

A relatively new category of neoclassical finance theory is the "financial instrument". In the generally accepted sense, a tool is understood as a means, a method used to achieve something. In the classical theory of finance, macroeconomic regulation of the integration of financial flows into real investments is carried out mainly by monetary methods (regulation of prices, bank interest, the exchange rate of the national currency, tax rates). An exception is the distribution of money savings and income through public consumption funds, which are mainly pursuing social goals. In the real sector of the economy, the term "financial instruments" has been replaced by the concept of "sources of financing", which is devoid of the main market feature - a legal characteristic. For example, the term “own sources of finance” is not identical with the concept of “investors' right to a share in a business”. It is no coincidence that none of the legislation contains norms governing sources of funding; at the same time, there is a national institution for the protection of investors' rights.

In neoclassical theory, a financial instrument is understood as a planning instrument, which, by definition, identifies financial rights and obligations that are traded on the market, usually in documentary form. A financial instrument is any contract that simultaneously creates a financial asset for one entity and a financial liability or equity instrument for another.

With the help of financial instruments, relations are formed between participants in reproduction processes, and their content is negotiated. In international practice, there are strict quality standards for financial instruments. In particular, the International Financial Reporting Standards (LAS 39) provide for special procedures for the assessment and recognition of financial instruments of commercial organizations. Direct participation of the state in planning the economic activities of economic entities would contradict the principles of a market economy. However, the state should have the opportunity, moreover, the obligation to assess the socio-economic consequences of the use of certain financial instruments by economic entities.

In the concepts of "financial resources" and "financial instruments" two points, characterized by both finance and capital, converge as closely as possible. This makes it possible to form an organic connection between the one and the other in an integral system of relations of social reproduction, functioning in the coordinates of the market system. In particular, the amount of capital is determined by clearing the financial resources of an economic entity from that part of financial instruments that is defined by the concept of "obligation". In this case, the volume of investments is balanced by the volume of owners' rights, and the currency of such a balance, formed at the end of each reproduction cycle, is the argument of strategic investors in this business.

The evolution of the theory of finance has not changed the essence of this category, defined as part of economic relations regarding the distribution and redistribution of the value of gross domestic product, income from foreign economic activity and part of the national wealth. At the same time, the target aspect in the characteristics of finance is shifted. The formation and use of funds of funds from business entities and the state, from the point of view of neoclassical finance, is considered as an intermediate result. The end result is understood as the provision of such proportions of the financial distribution of the value of the social product, which contribute to the accumulation of the aggregate capital of society.

Thus, in the neoclassical theory, finance is understood as a part of the economic relations that arise between the subjects of the reproduction process regarding the distribution and redistribution of the value of the social product and part of the national wealth, aimed at ensuring the growth of financial resources and capital accumulation of economic entities, as well as financing the functions of the state. Such financial relations are recognized as effective, the result of which is expressed in the expanded reproduction of the aggregate capital mobilized by economic entities in the financial market and the labor market. In this context, the area of ​​knowledge referred to as "financial theory" has recently given way to the concept of "financial economic theory", or neoclassical theory of finance, an independent direction of which is institutional finance.

It is easy to see that the core of the neoclassical theory of finance is the systematization of knowledge about the principles of functioning of financial markets and, in particular, theoretical constructions and practical tools from the perspective of market participants.

The focus on capital markets and major companies is not accidental. As world experience shows, joint-stock companies play a special role in a real market economy. Their share in the total number of enterprises of various forms of ownership may be relatively small, but their significance from the standpoint of their contribution to the creation of the country's national wealth is extremely high. Thus, in the United States, at present, 10% of companies are joint stock companies, 10% are partnerships, 80% are small companies that are individually owned; at the same time, each of the selected groups of companies accounts for 80, 13 and 7% of the total volume of sales of products and services, respectively. Even more significant is the level of concentration of capital and the importance of individual companies in the developed countries of Asia (for example, in South Korea), where literally a few super corporations control, in fact, the entire national economy. Likewise, the role of financial markets is great; it is these markets that are the catalyst for many economic shocks (for example, the Great Depression in the United States in the 30s, the recent financial crises in South America, Asia, Japan, etc.).

The main disadvantages of neoclassical theory. But it so happened that the course Human Resource Management is called Human Resource Management and the course of Institutional Theory of Institutional Economics. Nobel Prizes in Economics have already been awarded 4 times for research in the field of institutional theory ...

Share your work on social media

If this work did not suit you at the bottom of the page there is a list of similar works. You can also use the search button

Lecture number 1. Institutionalism and marginalism

First of all, a few words about the title of the course "Institutional Economics". From a scientific point of view, it is unfortunately incorrect. Economics is an object of study, and institutional theory (institutionalism) is a method, a school, an approach to the study of economics. An alternative to it is the neoclassical approach, which in English textbooks is called Ec o nomics as opposed to the economy - Economy.

Therefore, of course, it would be more correct to call the course "Institutional Theory of Economics" or "Institutional Economic Theory". But it so happened that the course "Personnel Management" is called "Human Resource Management", and the course "Institutional Theory" - "Institutional Economics".

Institutional theory is a new scientific school that emerged at the beginning XX centuries and for a long time demonstratively ignored by the official scientific doctrine - neoclassical theory. However, gradually the institutional approach is gaining more and more number of supporters. Nobel Prizes in Economics have already been awarded 4 times for research in the field of institutional theory. Recently, the word "institution" has become one of the most used both in economic theory and in sociology, politics, and even in everyday life. All of you have probably heard such expressions as the institution of the family, the institution of taxation, the institution of bankruptcy, etc.

Institutionalism claims neither more nor less to change the research program (scientific paradigm) - a system of fundamental views on what the economy and society are. In this sense, he opposes the neoclassical direction or marginalism - the modern mainstream. Mainstream ( mainstream ) Is the main current that explains all phenomena in the field of knowledge in which this science is engaged.

There is such a scientific joke: "The greatness of a scientist is determined by how long he slowed down the development of science."

There is a huge grain of truth in this joke. The slimmer and more beautiful the theory proposed by the scientist, the closer it is to real life, the more difficult it is to abandon it. Followers endlessly develop and refine this theory. They try to explain everything in the world with her, even that which does not fit into it. "Stretch" it over the real world and declare it the only true one.

From this point of view, and not only from this, Adam Smith was the greatest scientist and economist. Because he offered such a simple, understandable and coherent theory of economics that this theory continues to dominate the minds of scientists for several centuries. His theory is usually called classical. Its most prominent representatives are also William Petty and David Ricardo.

The successors of the classical theory (neoclassicists) were the scientists of the Austrian (Menger, Böhm-Bawerk, Wieser), Lausanne (Walras and Pareto) and the Cambridge economic schools (Marshall), as well as the younger generation - Mises, Schumpeter, Hayek.

The great merit of the marginalists lies, in particular, in the fact that they introduced mathematics into economics. This made the reasoning about economics much more rigorous and verifiable. To prove many very important dependencies, first of all, in the field of price formation, the study of problems of economic equilibrium and unemployment.

Institutionalism as an alternative scientific school does not at all pretend to disavow all the achievements of the neoclassical school. The point is that the conclusions obtained by the marginalists are correct within the framework of the scientific hypotheses on which they rely. But these scientific hypotheses themselves do not always correspond to reality.

Joan Robinson: “Regarding the set of assumptions of economic theory, two questions should be asked: can it be worked with and does it correspond to the real world? ... And more often than not, one set of assumptions is convenient and the other is realistic. "

Let's take a closer look at this issue.

What is a "research program"

The term "Research Program" belongs to Imre Lakatos. In order to compare research programs with each other, it is necessary to highlight such components as:

• scientific language or categorical apparatus (the same terms in different theories can mean different things);
• key and auxiliary scientific hypotheses;
• metaphysical paradigms (explanatory models);
• conceptual problems that define the same questions that researchers ask themselves (answers may vary).

Questions that are of interest to representatives of one research pr O grams, may be completely uninteresting to representatives of another. Opponent and the existence of blows, as a rule, within close currents.

Thus, the disputes between metaphysicians (idealists and materialists) about the primacy of spirit or matter are irrelevant for positivists who study phenomena, and not "mythical" entities.

The confrontation between neoclassicists and new institutionalists over the main actor of the economy (an economic person or a person of institute at rational) is not interesting to Marxists, for whom the unit of analysis is not the individual, but the attitude. For example, a product.

Scientific language

The language of science is different from ordinary language. It's like a metalanguage, where all words have a fairly precise meaning.

Example 1 ... The concept of a point in the theory of language and in geometry is completely different. s value. In the first case, we are talking about a punctuation mark that separates one sentence from another. In the second - about a figure that has no dimension.

Example 2 ... In jurisprudence, an essential condition of a contract is called not just an important condition, but a condition without which this contract is not considered but turned on.

Examples of neoclassical economic language.

Imputed (alternative) costs(opportunity cost ) - incomes donated by the owner of resources, using these resources in a certain way (in their own economic activities).

We will consider examples of institutional scientific language as we introduce the corresponding concepts.

Axiomatics

Axiomatics is a system of statements (axioms), which, as it seems to us, is confirmed by real life and therefore accepted without proof.

We all know the axioms of geometry: two parallel lines do not intersect, etc. So, each science has its own system of assumptions. Moreover, this system consists of two parts: a solid core and a protective layer.

Solid core - these are assumptions that are a priori accepted as irrefutable.

Protective layer Is a belt of auxiliary hypotheses surrounding a solid core used to explain a particular phenomenon. These assumptions can be abandoned without significant damage to the solid core. Replace them with others.

SOLID CORE

In the now dominant neoclassical economic theory, the following assumptions are attributed to the hard core.

1. Economic agents are independentisolated individualswith their own interests (preferences) and free will. O b a society is a collection of independent (autonomous) individuals.

That is, the center of social life is free, independent individuals. and dy who are free to uniteto join or not to unite in any collective formations.Any social phenomenon can be explained through the behavior of individual individuals.

2. The purpose of the activities of individuals ismaximizing one's own benefit in the conditions and limited resources and opportunities.

In other words, the individual has a certain system of preferences and in the conditions of G of limited opportunities seeks to extract for himself the maximum and maximum possible benefit. This does not mean that the individual always thinks only of himself. Some people are really only concerned with themselves. Dr at Some cannot imagine their own happiness without the happiness of their loved ones. Still others would like to feed and make the whole world happy. That is, from the point of view of n e classical theory,selfishness does not exclude altruism... And the benefit is understood in the very wide O in a sense: from maximizing one's own well-being to happiness for only h e manners.

3. The relationship between individuals is exchange theirs benefits. About portions of the exchange are determined by the value of the goods exchanged. The very value of connections a on with the preferences of the individual in conditions of limited resources, that is, with n smoking needs oh stey.

Benefits are again understood in the broadest sense. You can exchange d e neg for communication. Making the right decision. Favor.

4. The actions of individuals are based onrational choice... Individual, o b possessing parametric knowledge, ranks the available alternatives and chooses the best h I shove, correlating costs with utility. The choice of the individual is based on the name NS restrictions and his system of preferences.

According to neoclassical theory, the individual always chooses. And he chooses deliberately. He knows his needs and preferences, understands his possibilities f and solves the problem of maximizing and of the utility.

5. The individual's preference system is formed exogenously... That is, given and z start but, and is not the result of the activity or interaction of individuals.

This, of course, does not mean that an individual's preferences are set once and for all and will never change. The point is that the individual's preferences are not e are in the process of choice.

PROTECTIVE LAYER

The following assumptions belong to the protective layer of neoclassical theory.

1. Economic agents havecomplete information about available al ternat and wah, including their long-term effects.

That is, the choice is made not only consciously. He is still ideally informative. and it is provided. The individual is well aware of what options are available. T viy are possible, and to what after d his choice will lead to consequences.

• Economic agents do not always have complete information about the available alternatives and their possible consequences.
• Information is usually incomplete and asymmetrically distributed.

2. Information processing costs(decision-making) nonexistent.

Even under the assumption that all information about the market is available to the individual (number of e number of participants - sellers and buyers, the price of goods, etc.), creatures at There is also the problem of its comprehension - processing. Classic market models this pr o bloom in vn and mania is not accepted.

• The assumption of the availability, free-of-charge and zero costs of information processing in modern conditions does not correspond has no reality.
• The receipt of information, its verification and processing are associated with and with holders.

3. Benefits (goods) exchanged between individuals, homogeneous.

From the point of view of neoclassical theory, any product has only two dimensions. e niya: quantity and price. This does not mean that there is only one type of sausage or washing machine. Fortunately, this is a certain type of sausage or a type of washing machine, which consumers clearly distinguish. Ying NS in other words, goods with different quality characteristics a we act as different goods for the consumer. Therefore, there is no cost of measuring the quality m oh vara.

• The benefits are heterogeneous.
• In addition to price and quantity, the decision of the individual is influenced by other significant characteristics of the product, first of all, the quality.

4. Rights all economic agents are precisely defined and protected e us.

In order for the resource to pass from individual A to individual B, only b to the free will of both parties. In this case, both the rights of the individual A and the rights of the individual and type B are effectively protected both from the opportunistic behavior of the parties to the transaction and from possible actions of third parties. Private property is sacred.

• Individuals do not always adhere to established rules and and with fulfill their obligations. People tend to pr e pursuing personal gain using deceit.
• This poses problems with specifications and rights protection.

5. There are no individual or group privileges, and there are no extra O nomic coercion. The way the market operates is free concession.

Free competition implies that there are many buyers and sellers in the market, and the share of each of them is so insignificant that they cannot influence the market situation, in particular ur about the prices.

Modern researchers understand that v privileges and non-economic coercion, new restrictions on economic activity come

A) barriers to entry and exit from the market... They can be of various types:

administrative- licenses for the development of deposits, the allocation of sites for building, quotas for fishing or foreign trade quotas;

property - substantial initial capital is required to start a business;

reputational - the market has already been divided, brands are more or less settled, the entry of a new player requires huge costs to promote a new brand;

technological- difficulties in organizing production, etc.

Another thing is that in a market economy, almost any barrier is overcome by money - the acquisition of knowledge, technologies, brands. But by itself, the cla with the classical theory did not analyze such problems;

B) The assumption that the actions of one economic agent are not O It does not work under conditions when one producer operates on the market or when several producers in one way or another have divided the market among themselves.

Monopoly - the type of market structure, in which there is one seller, e lonely goods. This gives him the opportunity to influence couples. a meters of the market - the aggregate supply, and therefore the level of prices. Transneft

Oligopoly - the type of market structure when the supply side is represented by e a large number of large sellers homogeneous products. Total interdependence and the bridge of sellers is the main feature of the oligopolistic market. Depending on n a the presence or absence of collusion between sellers distinguish between cooperative and non e cooperative oligop about Leah.

Extraction of diamonds, oil (resource rarity). Cellular operators, cars (economies of scale)

Monopolistic competition- type of market structure, when the supply side is represented by a small number of large sellers whose products differentiated ... Products have a high substitution rate but are not completely interchangeable. a changeable. Therefore, manufacturing companies can influence the price.

Elite cosmetics. Fashionable "branded" clothing, footwear, accessories.

Rejection of the concept of absolute rationality

• Economic agents are limited in their ability to set goals and calculate the long-term consequences of their p e shenii.
• Since the receipt and processing of information requires a p zhek, with a these costs are included in the decision-making process.
• Individuals strive not to maximize benefits, but to achieve a certain level of satisfaction

Explaining Models

The belief system is designed to explain what is happening. In neoclassical theory, this is, first of all, the “invisible hand of the market”.

Each individual enters into exchange relations, focusing on his own benefit (egoism). Since there is no extra-economic coercion, it is opposed by exactly the same egoists who strive to maximize their own utility functions. As a result of the opposition of buyers and sellers, equilibrium prices are formed - economic indicators that balance supply and demand for similar goods.

If the prices for a certain product are too low, the producers (sellers) do not suit, they switch to the production of other goods, the supply decreases, and prices rise. If prices are too high, new producers rush into this type of activity, supply rises, and prices fall. The result is an economic balance.

That is, the allocation (distribution) of resources is regulated by the price mechanism.

“It is not from the benevolence of a butcher, brewer, or baker we expect to get our lunch, but from their own self-interest. We do not appeal to their humanity, but to their selfishness, and we tell them not about our needs, but about their benefits. " A. Smith

Economic efficiency is achieved when the goods (resources) go to those who can pay the highest price for them.

In Soviet times, representatives of the military space industry somehow decided that it was better to use natural cork for a certain part, rather than plastic. Since this industry was one of the privileged, the plug was not given a vi n industry, and sent to rocket scientists. Elite wines have become a cover with plastic corks. Their price dropped sharply. A rocket scientists h e for a while, they themselves abandoned the pro b ki.

It is clear that if the traffic jam went to someone who is willing to pay more for it, the e the division would be completely different.

Major flaws in neoclassical theory

This economic theory, which is usually called neoclassical, is now taught in all universities in the world under the name "Economics".

We can already see that this theory has abandoned many of its original assumptions. At the present stage, there is a significant destruction (change) of the protective layer of the neoclassical theory. Nevertheless, it continues to be dominant. Therefore, it makes sense to take a closer look at its solid core.

The main disadvantages of neoclassical theory include: antihistoricism; universalism; rationalism; individualism.

Antihistoricism

Neoclassical theory assumes that the market economy, private property, free competition are the pinnacle of human development, its final point.

Meanwhile free exchange economy between owners, described by Smith and underlying the economic-mathematical model of Walras's equilibrium, is the economy of England in the late 17th century.

The modern market economy differs from Smith's ideal model in that:

1) the main actors (economic agents) are not people, but firms (corporations);

2) the main economic relationship is not the purchase and sale of goods, but the purchase and sale of capital (the leading market is not the commodity market, but the financial market);

3) property is separated from management, transformed from a right to a thing into a right to claim against a business entity. Shareholders do not have ownership rights either to the property of the company or to it itself;

4) economic agents are in dependent relationships (these are business groups, networks, and agreements on joint activities);

5) free competition is characteristic of local markets only during the period of their formation. Then all sorts of entry and exit barriers come into play, special relationships with contractors, government agencies, creditors, etc.

It turns out that the classical market economy is not at all a final point, but an intermediate stage on the path of society's development. And attempts to return everything to square one, for example, the fight against intra-group (transfer) prices, are attempts to stop the flow. Moreover, the current is very, very strong.

Universalism

The second essential characteristic of neoclassical theory is the idea of ​​the existence of a single universal model of a market economy.

It must be said that the economic model described by classical economic theory does not exist in nature.There have never been societies where most of the needs of the population were met on the basis of small-scale production - free exchange of goods between owners - producers..

Even if we disregard all sorts of forms of personal dependence and class privileges that permeated all the countries of the Old World, and turn to North America (in the South, as you know, there was slavery), we will see that small farms satisfied most of their needs with food own production. That is, they were mostly natural. And as soon as we move on to developed commodity exchange, we immediately come across large economic entities: Roman and Carthaginian latifundia, medieval workshops, manufactories, capitalist factories.

But even if we assume that 17th century England was exactly as described in Smith's ideal model, we still have to ask ourselves: is this model universal?

Models of capitalism

Currently, there are four most common models of capitalism: shareholding, banking, family and state.

Equity capitalism(Shareholder capitalism ) - the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism, in which the population saves mainly by investing in corporate securities - stocks and bonds. Financing of corporations is carried out by attracting savings of the population and funds of institutional investors (pension funds, insurance, investment companies, etc.). Equity participation is dispersed.

Management functions are performed by professional hired managers. Investors, with the help of independent auditors, monitor the quality of management. The share price reflects the consensus about corporate performance and the quality of corporate governance.

In the shareholder model of capitalism, the company is protected from the opportunistic behavior of managers by means of a developed stock market, O allowing small shareholders with the help of "voting with their feet" to change the market quotations of the company's securities, that is, to influence the company's ability to and attraction of capital.

Another way to deal with opportunistic behavior is to practice anti-opportunistic behavior. f Deal acquisitions. Companies that reduce the effectiveness of their activities O and hence market capitalization become targets for pr O professional raiders, accumulating a significant part of the shares of the a nii to change the management team, increase stock prices and give them next sale.

Banking capitalism(Bank capitalism ) - continental, first of all, the German model of capitalism, in which the population makes savings mainly in the form of bank deposits. Investments are carried out by banks both in the form of loan financing and in the form of purchasing securities of companies. This model is characterized by a very high degree of concentration of capital - large shareholders own significant blocks of shares (25, 50 and more percent). Monitoring of the quality of management is carried out by majority shareholders, as well as by representatives of institutional investors: banks, insurance companies, investment funds, which are large shareholders and trustees (representatives) of small shareholders. In addition, representatives of its employees are included in the process of making key decisions regarding the company's activities.

In the banking model of capitalism, opposition to opportunistic O management of hired managers and large shareholders is carried out by special and a specially created system of checks and balances - the inclusion of representatives of other interested groups, primarily banks and workers in the key corporate management processes. and cov.

The important role of credit institutions in the management of German companies is due to the significant share of loan financing and significant blocks of shares owned and operated e research institutes of German banks.

In addition, the German control model is characterized by so n a called co-determination, namely, the participation of employees in the management of the company.

The German model is characterized by a two-tier board of directors (for companies with more than 500 employees): Supervisory c O vet and the Board. In companies with 500 to 2,000 employees, observers b the council should be one third of the company's employees, in which m events with more than 2 thousand employees about a century - by 50%.

The Supervisory Board monitors the work of the board, appoints members of the board, sets the size of their salaries and may pre-term e reduce their powers. Members of the supervisory board are prohibited from holding leadership positions in executive offices. r gans of the company.

Family (network) capitalism(Family capitalism ) Is one of the most common models of capitalism, which has long historical roots and prevails in Asia and Latin America, as well as Italy, Canada, and Sweden. It is capitalism based on business groups controlled by a clan of dominant partners (family). Minority shareholders are attracted to obtain additional capital, but do not have a majority of voting shares in any company of the group. The main tools used to establish control over the companies included in the group are: the pyramidal structure of the group and the use of different classes of shares (ordinary and preferred).

In the family model of corporate control, the opportunistic behavior of managers is suppressed by the direct control of partners over the agent. b the company's identity. Competitors' unfair actions cannot be and lead in this model to a change in the configuration of property rights (influence I am niya), since the controlling stakes in voting shares of all companies included in the business structure are concentrated in the at kah one group.

State capitalism(State capitalism ) is characterized by the fact that capital for business development is provided, first of all, by the state, accumulating it with the help of tax exemptions. The state directly or indirectly (through holding structures) owns controlling stakes in the most significant companies. Government officials control the management of corporations.

An example of state capitalism is the Chinese economy. Our state corporations.

In the model of state capitalism, control over the hired manager a we are carried out by specially authorized representatives of the state. As a rule, at the legislative level, the principles of voting on significant events in the life of an economic community are established. e nstvo.

However, it is necessary to understand that both network and state capitalism have a very important fundamental drawback - the restriction of competition. Both the state and family groups control the actions of hired managers. e moat. But the ineffective decisions of the controllers themselves, if they lead to a change of owners (their representatives) and a change in the company's policy, then with a very large but with a hold.

Rationalism

The notion that an individual's actions are always based on a rational choice of the best available alternative does not correspond to reality.

Human actions are determined not only by rational choice. Most of the actions that a person performs are routine. People follow:

1) habits - acquired patterns of behavior, developed as some well-established ways of reacting to certain external events (routines, stereotypes);

2) conventional rules- the rules of conduct adopted by their community in certain circumstances (patterns of behavior);

3) values- ideas about what is good and what is bad (behaviors).

Habit ... The habit does not need rational explanation at the individual level and is not colored by the idea of ​​what is good or bad. It focuses on what everyone else is doing, or what the person himself is used to doing. So did his parents, acquaintances, or he himself once developed this model of behavior, she arranged for him, and he always began to do this.

According to Confucius, a person has three ways to act rationally: the first, the most noble one, is meditation; the second and the easiest one is imitation; the third and most bitter one is the experience.

Conventional provision- This is a norm (model) of behavior accepted in a given society, which allows community members to understand each other's behavior and coordinate their actions. Rules of conduct in a given situation. External norms that facilitate interaction between people.

People are not always able to do what they want. By participating in collective actions, each person is forced to adapt to the requirements of others.

When familiar people meet, they greet (greet each other). The man lets the lady go ahead. The subordinate pretends to listen and the chief.

In other words, people are objects of social control. A person compares his actions with socially specified requirements.

Value guidelines... Here we can already talk about rationality. But not in the sense of achieving certain goals or maximizing one's own utility function, but in the sense of a conscious choice of an alternative based on a value assessment of behavior.

Max Weber distinguished between goal-oriented (goal-rational) and value-oriented (value-rational) behavior.

The choice of an individual is based on a certain idea of ​​the guidelines and boundaries of human behavior. What is good and what is bad. What to strive for. What boundaries can not be crossed.

This behavior is often based on religious taboos. In Indian caste culture, if you strive to leave your caste in this life, you lose the chance to advance when you are reborn.

For almost the entire history of Europe, the lust for profit was considered unworthy of benefits. O a loved one. In recent history, a successful entrepreneur has embodied e the adoption of "American", "European", etc. dreams.

W. Sombart defines traditional behavior as follows:

1. When making a decision, a traditional person looks not forward, not at the goal of his action, but backward, at examples of the past, at experience.

2. In the future, the force of habit is added to the power of tradition, which makes a person do what he did before and therefore knows how to do.

3. An individual as a member of a group, in an effort to prove himself worthy of its member, especially cultivates those cultural values ​​that are characteristic of this group.

Individualism

Finally, the last and most important characteristic of neoclassical theory is individualism. The center of social life is the individual, and the individual chooses.

Marginalism is ready to abandon the inviolability of almost all of its prerequisites: freedom of competition, completeness of information, absolute rationality and protection of property rights. I am ready to admit market barriers and transaction costs. But the principle of methodological individualism - all actions and influences in the economy are the prerogative of individual choice - this is the holy of holies.

Meanwhile, a person, as offensive as it sounds, is a herd animal.

The universality of the collective life of people is caused by biological necessity: a human child is born so undeveloped and helpless that, remaining alone, he simply could not survive.

People always live in groups. And the vast majority of their actions are related to the past, present or future behavior of their comrades. In addition, people are objects of social control. By participating in collective actions, each person is forced to adapt to the requirements of others.

From our birth, and maybe even earlier, we come under the influence of the environment, which squeezes us into a certain rut of our skills and desires (W. Sombart "Bourgeois").

The individual is born immersed in social reality. The reality of belonging to

certain communities - family, social group, society;

certain culture - thinking stereotypes, interpretations, values, norms;

certain skills - knowledge, technology, routines.

The gradual adaptation of the individual to these realities makes him human.

Therefore, for the study of social (including economic) life, it seems more reasonable to combine methodological individualism with methodological socialism, 1 according to which the behavior of people is determined not only by their free will, but also by the prevailing experience of social interaction.

From the point of view of methodological individualism, the coordination of activities is carried out by establishing general rules of behavior (social contract) and current agreements between interacting individuals. Methodological socialism believes that the coordination of activities is the result not only of formal norms and current agreements, but also of previous social development, established implicit agreements that make it possible for a general interpretation of what is happening.

That is, you and I live in a world where things have already taken shape before us:

• patterns of behavior in a given situation;
• ideas about what is good and bad;
• ideas about what we should strive for;
• ways of interpreting the environment and specific actions.

What Institutional Theory Learns I am

Human society is a joint activity of people, ordered in a certain way.

In joint activities, people either unite their efforts to achieve a common goal, or coordinate their actions, achieving results useful for themselves. An example of joint activity of the first kind is the household. An example of a joint activity of the second kind is a market transaction.

Joint activities can be technologically streamlined, that is, standardized and regulated in accordance with the requirements of technological processes for achieving a given result. From this point of view, joint activity acts as a combination of labor functions, and an individual person - as a resource. This perspective of the study of joint activities is the subject of the study of natural science disciplines.

But joint activities are ordered not only technologically, but also socially. Social orderliness, regulation of joint activities is achieved through the existence of social norms of behavior.

Social norms can be divided into three groups: formal, conventional and ethical.

Formal normsare established forcibly, and their observance is carried out using mechanisms of administrative or criminal coercion.

Examples of such norms are legal norms or norms established at the enterprise by internal orders and orders.

Ethical or moral standardsact as the inner convictions of a person. Although there is no doubt that these norms have been instilled in a person by his social upbringing, the compulsion to comply with these norms is carried out on the basis of an internal motivation, the impossibility of doing otherwise without losing self-identity.

Examples of such norms are religious commandments for true believers. Our inner beliefs, the origin of which we ourselves are not fully aware of.

Conventional provisionIs a norm (pattern, custom) of behavior accepted in a given society, which allows community members to understand each other's behavior and coordinate their actions.

Examples of conventional norms are the rules of decency, rules of etiquette, rules of class honor, cultural traditions, rituals of behavior prevailing in society.

Coercion to the execution of conventional norms is ensured by the desire of the individual to be his own in a certain community (group) of people, since the sanction for deviant behavior is exclusion from society or rejection from the collective.

Refusal of a nobleman from a duel. The beech man. White crow.

The conventional norm is often mimicked as ethical, since it appears in the form of morally approved behavior. But this norm is external, since it is guided not by moral duty, but by the expectations of others.

Over time, some conventional norms become formal ones.

Lawyers even single out such a source of law as customs.

Customary law is the norms that have developed by the force of domestic relations, independent and simo from the supreme power, and acquired in the consciousness of society an obligatory meaning e nition.

In historical sequence, customary law precedes law. And the first laws in most cases represent a fixation in the law O dative act of already established norms. But later the situation changes. With the strengthening of state power and the development of legislators b ness, the law takes precedence over customary law. Most gras f Danish codes of European countries recognizes customs, but only in one case - if the law does not regulate the resulting conflict. The effect of customary law begins and is found where it is silent and the end.

If we turn to Russian history, we will see that the monuments of the history of Russian O the right of the initial period: Russkaya Pravda, Pskov letter of judgment, Novgorod letter of judgment - are based mainly on customs. In mo with kovskoy state laws (letters, decrees, codes) become next to the NS tea, but still occupy an equal position. The old man continues to enjoy more respect than the will of sovereigns. The latter are not yet resolved on their own. I am to create the right, but only closed drink customs.

During the imperial period, the law supersedes the customary law. No longer repeats it, but goes against it. Has a reformatory character. But, as practice shows, laws that contradict customs, if implemented, are quite specific. and ical, not provided T form given by the legislator. Institutional barriers.

Institutionalism studies the impact of social norms on economic relations, joint economic activities of people. And vice versa: the impact of economic relations on social norms.

The main differences between the neoclassical and institutional science schools are summarized in Table 1.

QUESTIONS

1. The concept of a research program and its main components
2. Axiomatics of the Neoclassical Research Program: A Hard Core
3. The protective layer of neoclassical theory and its change
4. Purposeful and value-based rational behavior
5. Methodological individualism and methodological socialism
6. Basic models of capitalism
7. Types of social norms

Abstract topics

1. The main features of the Russian model of capitalism
2. Controversial assumptions of neoclassical theory
3. Social norms as regulators of economic behavior

Table 1. Major differences between the marginalist and institutional scholarly tradition

	Marginalism	Institutionalism
Axiomatics
Economic agents	Economic agents are independent isolated individuals with their own interests (subjective needs) and free will.	Economic agents are both individuals and and collective and supercollective (transpersonal) education. Individuals are products of social interaction.
The nature of the relationship	The relationship between individuals is an exchange the goods and services belonging to them.	Relationships between individuals are systems of collective action. Exchange is one of the forms of relationship. Other types of connections are also possible (trust, functional connection, emotional connection, etc.)
Foundations activities	The actions of individuals are based on rational choice.	Activities can be based not only on rational motives, but also on established routines and conventional norms.
Purpose of activity	Maximizing your own benefits in the face of limited resources and opportunities	Actions can be not only goal-oriented, but also value-oriented.
Formation preference systems	The individual's preference system is given exogenously.	The individual's preference system is the product of his training in groups that form the system of his values ​​and ideas about the desired.

1 Not to be confused with the social order!

COURSE WORK

Neoclassicism and institutionalism: a comparative analysis

Introduction

Course work is devoted to the study of neoclassicism and institutionalism, both at a theoretical level and in practice. This topic is relevant, in modern conditions of increasing globalization of socio-economic processes, there are general patterns and trends in the development of economic entities, including organizations. Organizations as economic systems are studied from the perspective of various schools and directions of Western economic thought. Methodological approaches in Western economic thought are represented mainly by two leading directions: neoclassical and institutional.

Objectives of studying the course work:

to get an idea of ​​the origin, formation and modern development of neoclassical and institutional economic theory;

familiarize yourself with the main research programs of neoclassicism and institutionalism;

show the essence and specifics of neoclassical and institutional methodology for the study of economic phenomena and processes;

Objectives of studying the course work:

to give a holistic view of the basic concepts of neoclassical and institutional economic theory, to show their role and significance for the development of modern models of economic systems;

understand and assimilate the role and importance of institutions in the development of micro - and macrosystems;

acquire the skills of economic analysis of law, politics, psychology, ethics, traditions, habits, organizational culture and codes of economic conduct;

determine the specifics of the neoclassical and institutional environment and take it into account when making economic decisions.

The subject of study of neoclassical and institutional theory is economic relations and interactions, and the object is neoclassicism and institutionalism as the basis of economic policy. When selecting information for the course work, the views of various scholars were considered in order to understand how ideas about neoclassical and institutional theory have changed. Also, when studying the topic, the statistical data of economic journals were used, the literature of the latest editions was used. Thus, the information of the course work is compiled using reliable sources of information and provides objective knowledge on the topic: neoclassicism and institutionalism: a comparative analysis.

1. Theoretical principles of neoclassicism and institutionalism

.1 Neoclassical economics

The emergence and evolution of neoclassicism

Neoclassical economics emerged in the 1870s. The neoclassical direction investigates the behavior of an economic person (consumer, entrepreneur, employee), who seeks to maximize income and minimize costs. The main categories of analysis are limit values. Neoclassical economists have developed the theory of marginal utility and the theory of marginal productivity, the theory of general economic equilibrium, according to which the mechanism of free competition and market pricing ensures a fair distribution of income and full use of economic resources, the economic theory of welfare, the principles of which form the basis of the modern theory of public finance (P Samuelson), the theory of rational expectations, etc. In the second half of the 19th century, along with Marxism, neoclassical economic theory emerged and developed. Of all its many representatives, the most famous was the English scientist Alfred Marshall (1842-1924). He was a professor and head of the Department of Political Economy at the University of Cambridge. A. Marshall summarized the results of new economic research in the fundamental work "Principles of Economic Theory" (1890). In his works A. Marshall relied both on the ideas of classical theory and on the ideas of marginalism. Marginalism (from the English marginal - extreme, extreme) is a trend in economic theory that arose in the second half of the 19th century. Marginal economists used marginal values ​​in their studies, such as marginal utility (utility of the last, additional unit of good), marginal productivity (output produced by the last employee hired). These concepts were used by them in the theory of prices, the theory of wages and in explaining many other economic processes and phenomena. In his theory of prices, A. Marshall relies on the concept of supply and demand. The price of a good is determined by the ratio of supply and demand. The demand for a good is based on subjective assessments of the marginal utility of a good by consumers (buyers). The supply of goods is based on production costs. A manufacturer cannot sell at a price that does not cover his production costs. If the classical economic theory considered the formation of prices from the standpoint of the producer, then the neoclassical theory considers pricing both from the standpoint of the consumer (demand) and from the standpoint of the producer (supply). Neoclassical economic theory, like the classics, proceeds from the principle of economic liberalism, the principle of free competition. But in their studies, neoclassicists place more emphasis on the study of applied practical problems, to a greater extent they use quantitative analysis and mathematics than qualitative (meaningful, cause-and-effect). The greatest attention is paid to the problems of efficient use of limited resources at the microeconomic level, at the level of an enterprise and a household. Neoclassical economic theory is one of the foundations of many areas of modern economic thought.

The main representatives of neoclassicism

A. Marshall: Principles of Political Economy

It was he who introduced the term "economics" into everyday life, thereby emphasizing his understanding of the subject of economics. In his opinion, this term reflects research more fully. Economic science investigates the economic aspects of the conditions of social life, the incentives for economic activity. Being a purely applied science, it cannot ignore questions of practice; but questions of economic policy are not its subject. Economic life must be viewed outside of political influences, outside of government intervention. There were discussions among economists about what is the source of the cost of labor costs, utility, production factors. Marshall turned the controversy into a different plane, coming to the conclusion that one should not look for a source of value, but investigate the factors that determine prices, their level, and dynamics. The concept, developed by Marshall, was his Roma compromise between different areas of economic science. The main idea put forward by him is to switch efforts from theoretical disputes around value to studying the problems of the interaction of supply and demand as the forces that determine the processes taking place in the market. Economic science studies not only the nature of wealth, but also the incentives for economic activity. "Scales of the Economist" - monetary values. Money measures the intensity of incentives that prompt a person to take action and make decisions. The analysis of the behavior of individuals forms the basis of the "Principles of Political Economy". The author's attention is focused on examining the specific mechanism of economic activity. The mechanism of a market economy is studied primarily at the micro level, and subsequently at the macro level. The postulates of the neoclassical school, at the origin of which was Marshall, represent the theoretical basis of applied research.

J. B. Clarke: Theory of Income Distribution

The classical school considered the problem of distribution as an integral element of the general theory of value. The prices of goods were made up of the shares of the remuneration of production factors. Each factor had its own theory. According to the views of the Austrian school, the incomes of the factors were formed as derived quantities from the market prices of the products produced. An attempt to find a common basis for the value of both factors and products on the basis of uniform principles was undertaken by economists of the neoclassical school. American economist John Bates Clark set out to "show that the distribution of social income is governed by social law and that this law, if it acted without resistance, would give each factor of production the amount that this factor creates." Already in the formulation of the goal there is a summary - each factor gets the share of the product that it creates. All subsequent contents of the book provide a detailed rationale for this summary - argument, illustrations, comments. In an effort to find a principle of income distribution that would determine the share of each factor in the product, Clark uses the concept of diminishing utility, which he transfers to factors of production. In this case, the theory of consumer behavior, the theory of consumer demand is replaced by the theory of the choice of production factors. Every entrepreneur seeks to find such a combination of applied factors, which provides a minimum cost and maximum income. Clark's reasoning is as follows. Two factors are taken, if one of them is taken unchanged, then the use of the other factor, as it quantitatively increases, will bring less and less income. Labor brings wages to its owner, capital - interest. If additional workers are hired with the same capital, then income increases, but not in proportion to the increase in the number of new workers.

A. Pigou: The Economic Theory of Welfare

The economic theory of A. Pigou considers the problem of the distribution of the national income, in the terminology of Pigou - the national dividend. He refers to it "everything that people buy with their monetary income, as well as the services provided to a person by the dwelling that he owns and in which he lives." However, services rendered to oneself and in the household and the use of publicly owned items are not included in this category.

The national dividend is the flow of goods and services produced in a society over the course of a year. In other words, this is the share of society's income that can be expressed in money: goods and services that make up final consumption. If Marshall appears before us as a taxonomist and theorist striving to cover the entire system of relations of the "ekhnomix", then Pigou was mainly engaged in the analysis of individual problems. Along with theoretical questions, he was interested in economic policy. In particular, he was interested in the question of how to reconcile private and public interests, to combine private and public costs. Pigou's focus is on the theory of public welfare, it is designed to answer, what is the common good? How is it achieved? How is the redistribution of benefits carried out from the standpoint of improving the position of members of society; especially the poorest. The construction of the railway benefits not only those who built and operates, but also the owners of nearby land plots. As a result of the construction of the railway, the price of land located near it will inevitably age. Owners of land participants, although not involved in construction, benefit from the rise in land prices. The overall national dividend is also growing. The criterion that must be taken into account is the dynamics of market prices. According to Pigou, "the main indicator is not the product itself or material goods, but in relation to the conditions of a market economy, market prices." But the construction of a railway can be accompanied by negative and very undesirable consequences, a deterioration of the ecological situation. People will suffer from noise, smoke, debris.

"Iron" harms crops, reduces yields, and undermines the quality of products.

The use of new technology often creates difficulties and creates problems that require additional costs.

Limits of applicability of the neoclassical approach

Neoclassical theory is based on unrealistic assumptions and constraints, and, therefore, it uses models that are inadequate to economic practice. Coase called this state of affairs in neoclassicism "chalkboard economics."

Economics expands the range of phenomena (for example, such as ideology, law, norms of behavior, family) that can be successfully analyzed from the point of view of economics. This process was called "economic imperialism". The leading representative of this direction is the Nobel laureate Harry Becker. But for the first time, Ludwig von Mises wrote about the need to create a general science studying human action, who proposed the term "praxeology" for this.

Within the framework of neoclassicism, there are practically no theories that satisfactorily explain the dynamic changes in the economy, the importance of study, which became relevant against the background of historical events of the XX century

Rigid core and neoclassical protective belt

Hard core :

Stable preferences that are endogenous;

Rational choice (maximizing behavior);

Market equilibrium and general equilibrium in all markets.

Protective belt:

Ownership rights remain unchanged and clearly defined;

The information is completely accessible and complete;

Individuals satisfy their needs through an exchange that takes place without cost, taking into account the initial distribution.

1.2 Institutional economics

Institute concept. The role of institutions in the functioning of the economy

The concept of the institution was borrowed by economists from the social sciences, in particular from sociology. An institution is a set of roles and statuses designed to meet a specific need. Definitions of institutions can also be found in works on political philosophy and social psychology. For example, the category of institution is one of the central in the work of John Rawls "Theory of Justice". Institutions are understood as a public system of rules that define the position and position with the corresponding rights and responsibilities, power and immunity, and the like. These rules specify certain forms of action as permitted and others as prohibited, punishing certain actions and protecting others when violence occurs. As examples, or more general social practices, we can cite games, rituals, courts and parliaments, markets and property systems.

In economic theory, the concept of an institution was first included in the analysis by Thorstein Veblen. Institutions are a common way of thinking about the particular relationship between society and the individual and the particular functions they perform; and the system of society's life, which is made up of the totality of those acting at a certain time or at any moment in the development of any society, can, from the psychological point of view, be characterized in general terms as a prevailing spiritual position or a widespread idea of ​​the way of life in society.

Veblen also understood by institutions:

behavior habits;

the structure of the production or economic mechanism;

the currently accepted system of social life.

Another founder of institutionalism, John Commons, defines an institution as follows: an institution - collective action to control, release and expand individual action.

Another classic of institutionalism, Wesley Mitchell, has the following definition: institutions are dominant and highly standardized social habits. Currently, within the framework of modern institutionalism, the most common is the interpretation of institutions by Douglas North: Institutions are rules, mechanisms that ensure their implementation, and norms of behavior that structure repetitive interactions between people.

The economic actions of an individual do not take place in an isolated space, but in a certain society. And therefore it is of great importance how the society will react to them. Thus, transactions that are acceptable and profitable in one location may not necessarily be worthwhile even under similar conditions elsewhere. An example of this is the restrictions imposed on the economic behavior of a person by various religious cults. In order to avoid the coordination of many external factors influencing success and the very possibility of making a particular decision, within the framework of the economic and social orders, schemes or algorithms of behavior are developed that are most effective under these conditions. These schemes and algorithms or matrices of the behavior of individuals are nothing more than institutions.

Traditional institutionalism

The "old" institutionalism, as an economic trend, emerged at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. It was closely associated with the historical direction in economic theory, with the so-called historical and new historical school (Liszt F., Schmoler G., Bretano L., Bucher K.). From the very beginning of its development, institutionalism was characterized by the upholding of the idea of ​​social control and the intervention of society, mainly the state, in economic processes. This was the legacy of the historical school, whose representatives not only denied the existence of stable deterministic relationships and laws in the economy, but also advocated the idea that the welfare of society could be achieved on the basis of strict state regulation of the economy of a nationalist persuasion. The most prominent representatives of the "Old Institutionalism" are: Thorstein Veblen, John Commons, Wesley Mitchell, John Galbraith. Despite a significant range of problems covered in the works of these economists, they did not manage to form their own unified research program. As Coase noted, the work of the American institutionalists led nowhere because they lacked the theory to organize the mass of descriptive material. The old institutionalism criticized the provisions that make up the "hard core of neoclassicism." In particular, Veblen rejected the concept of rationality and the corresponding maximization principle as fundamental in explaining the behavior of economic agents. The object of analysis is institutions, not human interactions in a space with limitations imposed by institutions. Also, the works of the old institutionalists are distinguished by significant interdisciplinarity, being, in fact, a continuation of sociological, legal, statistical research in their application to economic problems.

Neoinstitutionalism

Modern neoinstitutionalism has its origins in the works of Ronald Coase "The Nature of the Firm", "The Problem of Social Costs." The neo-institutionalists attacked in the first place the provisions of neoclassicism, which constitute its defensive core.

) First, the premise that exchange occurs without cost has been criticized. A criticism of this position can be found in the early works of Coase. Although, it should be noted that Menger wrote about the possibility of the existence of exchange costs and their influence on the decisions of the exchanging subjects in his "Foundations of Political Economy". Economic exchange occurs only when each of its participants, carrying out the act of exchange, receives some increase in value to the value of the existing set of goods. This is proved by Karl Menger in his work "Foundations of Political Economy", proceeding from the assumption of the existence of two participants in the exchange. The concept of transaction costs contradicts the thesis of neoclassical theory that the costs of functioning of the market mechanism are equal to zero. This assumption made it possible not to take into account the influence of various institutions in the economic analysis. Therefore, if transaction costs are positive, it is necessary to take into account the influence of economic and social institutions on the functioning of the economic system.

) Secondly, recognizing the existence of transaction costs, it becomes necessary to revise the thesis about the availability of information (information asymmetry). The recognition of the thesis about the incompleteness and imperfection of information opens up new prospects for economic analysis, for example, in the study of contracts.

) Third, the thesis of the neutrality of the distribution and specification of property rights has been revised. Research in this direction served as a starting point for the development of such directions of institutionalism as the theory of property rights and economics.

organizations. Within the framework of these areas, subjects of economic activity “economic organizations have ceased to be regarded as“ black boxes ”. Within the framework of "modern" institutionalism, attempts are also made to modify or even change the elements of the rigid core of neoclassicism. First of all, this is the premise of neoclassicism about rational choice. In institutional economics, classical rationality is modified by making assumptions about bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior. Despite the differences, almost all representatives of neoinstitutionalism consider institutions through their influence on the decisions made by economic agents. In doing so, the following fundamental tools related to the human model are used: methodological individualism, utility maximization, bounded rationality, and opportunistic behavior. Some representatives of modern institutionalism go even further and question the very premise of utility-maximizing behavior of the economic person, suggesting its replacement with the principle of satisfaction. In accordance with the classification of Tran Eggertsson, representatives of this direction form their own direction in institutionalism - a new institutional economy, representatives of which can be considered O. Williamson and G. Simon. Thus, the distinction between neoinstitutionalism and the new institutional economy can be drawn depending on which preconditions are subject to replacement or modification within their framework - the "hard core" or "protective belt".

The main representatives of neo-institutionalism are: R. Coase, O. Williamson, D. North, A. Alchian, Simon G., L. Thévenot, Menard K., Buchanan J., Olson M., R. Posner, G. Demsetz, S. Pejovich, T. Eggertsson.

1.3 Comparison of neoclassicism and institutionalism

Common to all neoinstitutionalists is the following: first, that social institutions matter, and second, that they lend themselves to analysis using standard microeconomic tools. In the 1960-1970s. a phenomenon called by G. Becker "economic imperialism" began. It was during this period that economic concepts: maximization, equilibrium, efficiency, etc., began to be actively used in such areas related to the economy as education, family relations, health care, crime, politics, etc. This led to the fact that basic economic categories of neoclassicism received deeper interpretation and wider application.

Each theory consists of a core and a protective layer. Neo-institutionalism is no exception. He, like neoclassicism as a whole, considers the following to be among the main prerequisites:

§ methodological individualism;

§ economic man concept;

§ activity as an exchange.

However, in contrast to neoclassicism, these principles began to be carried out more consistently.

) Methodological individualism. In conditions of limited resources, each of us is faced with the choice of one of the available alternatives. The methods of analyzing the market behavior of an individual are universal. They can be successfully applied to any of the areas where a person must make a choice.

The basic premise of neoinstitutional theory is that people act in any field in pursuit of their personal interests, and that there is no insurmountable line between business and the social sphere or politics. 2) The concept of economic man . The second premise of neoinstitutional choice theory is the concept of the “economic man”. According to this concept, a person in a market economy identifies his preferences with a product. He seeks to make decisions that maximize the value of his utility function. His behavior is rational. The rationality of the individual has a universal meaning in this theory. This means that all people are guided in their activities primarily by the economic principle, i.e. compare the marginal benefits and marginal costs (and, above all, the benefits and costs associated with making decisions): However, in contrast to neoclassicism, which considers mainly physical (scarcity of resources) and technological limitations (lack of knowledge, practical skill, etc.) in the neoinstitutional theory, transaction costs are also considered, i.e. costs associated with the exchange of property rights. This happened because any activity is viewed as an exchange.

) Activity as an exchange. Proponents of neoinstitutional theory consider any area by analogy with the commodity market. The state, for example, with this approach is an arena of competition between people for influence on decision-making, for access to the distribution of resources, for places in the hierarchical ladder. However, the state is a market of a special kind. Its members have unusual property rights: voters can elect representatives to the highest bodies of the state, deputies - to pass laws, officials - to monitor their implementation. Voters and politicians are treated as individuals exchanging votes and campaign promises. It is important to emphasize that neoinstitutionalists are more realistic about the peculiarities of this exchange, given that people have limited rationality, and decision-making is associated with risk and uncertainty. Plus, you don't always have to make the best decisions. Therefore, institutionalists compare the costs of decision-making not with a situation that is considered exemplary in microeconomics (perfect competition), but with those real alternatives that exist in practice. This approach can be supplemented by the analysis of collective action, which involves the consideration of phenomena and processes from the point of view of the interaction of not one individual, but a whole group of people. People can be grouped according to social, property, religious, or party affiliation. At the same time, institutionalists can even deviate somewhat from the principle of methodological individualism, assuming that the group can be considered as the final indivisible object of analysis, with its own utility function, limitations, etc. However, it seems more rational to approach the consideration of a group as a combination of several individuals with their own utility functions and interests.

The institutional approach occupies a special place in the system of theoretical economic directions. Unlike the neoclassical approach, it focuses not so much on the analysis of the results of the behavior of economic agents, but on this behavior itself, its forms and methods. Thus, the identity of the theoretical object of analysis and historical reality is achieved.

Institutionalism is characterized by the predominance of explaining any processes, rather than predicting them, as in neoclassical theory. Institutional models are less formalized, therefore, within the framework of institutional forecasting, many more different predictions can be made.

The institutional approach deals with the analysis of a specific situation, which leads to more generalized results. Analyzing a specific economic situation, institutionalists compare not with the ideal, as in neoclassicism, but with another, real situation.

Thus, the institutional approach is more practical and closer to reality. Institutional economy models are more flexible and able to transform depending on the situation. Despite the fact that institutionalism does not tend to be engaged in forecasting, the importance of this theory is by no means diminished.

It should be noted that recently more and more economists are inclined towards the institutional approach in the analysis of economic reality. And this is justified, since it is the institutional analysis that makes it possible to achieve the most reliable, close to reality results in the study of the economic system. In addition, institutional analysis is an analysis of the qualitative side of all phenomena.

Thus, G. Simon notes that “as economic theory expands beyond its key area of ​​interest - the theory of price, which deals with the quantities of goods and money, there is a shift from purely quantitative analysis, where the central role is assigned to the equalization of limiting values, towards more qualitative institutional analysis, where discrete alternative structures are compared. And, carrying out a qualitative analysis, it is easier to understand how the development takes place, which, as it was found out earlier, is precisely qualitative changes. Having studied the development process, one can more confidently pursue a positive economic policy. "

In the theory of human capital, relatively little attention is paid to institutional aspects, especially the mechanisms of interaction between the institutional environment and human capital in an innovative economy. The static approach of neoclassical theory to the explanation of economic phenomena does not allow explaining the real processes taking place in the transitional economies of a number of countries, accompanied by a negative impact on the reproduction of human capital. The institutional approach has such an opportunity by explaining the mechanism of institutional dynamics and building theoretical constructions of the mutual influence of the institutional environment and human capital.

With sufficient developments in the field of institutional problems of the functioning of the national economy, in the modern economic domestic and foreign literature, there are practically no comprehensive studies of the reproduction of human capital based on the institutional approach.

The influence of socio-economic institutions on the formation of the productive abilities of individuals and their further movement along the stages of the reproductive process has been poorly studied. In addition, the issues of the formation of the institutional system of society, the identification of trends in its functioning and development, as well as the impact of these trends on the quality level of human capital, need serious study. In defining the essence of the institution, T. Veblen proceeded from two types of phenomena that affect the behavior of people. On the one hand, institutions are "habitual ways of responding to stimuli that are created by changing circumstances", on the other hand, institutions are "special ways of the existence of society, which form a special system of social relations."

The neoinstitutional direction considers the concept of institutions in a different way, interpreting them as norms of economic behavior that arise directly from the interaction of individuals.

They form a framework, limitations for human activities. D. North defines institutions as formal rules, agreements reached, internal restrictions on activities, certain characteristics of coercion to fulfill them, embodied in legal norms, traditions, informal rules, and cultural stereotypes.

The mechanism for ensuring the effectiveness of the institutional system is especially important. The degree to which the achievement of the goals facing the institutional system is consistent with the decisions of individuals depends on the effectiveness of coercion. Coercion, D. North notes, is carried out through the internal restrictions of the individual, the fear of punishment for violating the relevant norms, through state violence and social sanctions. It follows from this that formal and informal institutions are involved in the implementation of coercion.

The functioning of various institutional forms contributes to the formation of the institutional system of society. Therefore, the main object of optimization of the human capital reproduction process should be recognized not the organizations themselves, but socio-economic institutions as norms, rules and mechanisms for their implementation, changing and improving which can achieve the desired result.

2. Neoclassicism and institutionalism as the theoretical foundations of market reforms

.1 Neoclassical scenario of market reforms in Russia and its consequences

Since the neoclassicists believe that state intervention in the economy is not effective, and therefore should be minimal or absent, consider privatization in Russia in the 1990s. Many experts, primarily supporters of the Washington Consensus and shock therapy, considered privatization the core of the entire reform program, called for its large-scale implementation and the use of the experience of Western countries, justifying the need for the simultaneous introduction of a market system and the transformation of state-owned enterprises into private ones. At the same time, one of the main arguments in favor of accelerated privatization was the assertion that private enterprises are always more efficient than state ones, therefore, privatization should be the most important means of redistributing resources, improving management and generally increasing the efficiency of the economy. However, they understood that privatization would face certain difficulties. Among them, the lack of market infrastructure, in particular the capital market, and the underdevelopment of the banking sector, lack of sufficient investment, managerial and entrepreneurial skills, resistance from managers and employees, problems of "nomenclature privatization", imperfection of the legislative framework, including in the field of taxation. Proponents of vigorous privatization noted that it is being carried out in an environment of high inflation and low growth rates, leading to massive unemployment. They also pointed out the inconsistency of reforms and the lack of clear guarantees and conditions for the implementation of property rights, the need to reform the banking sector, the pension system, and create an effective stock market. The opinion of many experts on the need for preconditions for successful privatization, namely the implementation of macroeconomic reforms and the creation of a business culture in the country, is important. This group of specialists is characterized by the opinion that it is expedient in the conditions of Russia to attract widespread Western investors, creditors and consultants for the successful implementation of measures in the field of privatization. In the opinion of many experts, in conditions of a shortage of private capital, the choice boiled down to: a) finding a form of redistribution of state property between citizens; b) the choice of a few owners of private capital (often acquired illegally); c) recourse to foreign capital subject to restrictive measures. Privatization "according to Chubais" is more likely denationalization than real privatization. Privatization was supposed to create a large class of private owners, and instead, the "richest monsters" appeared, forming an alliance with the nomenclature. The role of the state remains excessive, producers still have more incentives to steal than to produce, the monopoly of producers has not been eliminated, and small business is developing very weakly. American experts A. Shleifer and R. Vishny, based on their study of the state of affairs at the initial stage of privatization, characterized it as “spontaneous”. They noted that property rights were informally redistributed among a limited number of institutional actors, such as the party and state apparatus, line ministries, local authorities, labor collectives and enterprise management. Hence - the inevitability of conflicts, the cause of which lies in the intersection of the control rights of such co-owners, the presence of many subjects of property with indefinite ownership rights.

Real privatization, according to the authors, is the redistribution of control rights over the assets of state-owned enterprises with the obligatory consolidation of the property rights of owners. In this regard, they proposed a large-scale corporatization of enterprises.

It should be noted that the further development of events largely followed this path. Large state-owned enterprises were turned into joint-stock companies, and the process of actual redistribution of property took place.

A voucher system aimed at equal distribution of equity capital among the population may be good, but there should be mechanisms to ensure that equity capital is not concentrated in the hands of the “wealthy minority”. However, in reality, ill-conceived privatization transferred the property of an essentially prosperous country into the hands of a corrupt, politically powerful elite.

Russian mass privatization, which began with the aim of eliminating the old economic power and accelerating the restructuring of enterprises, did not give the desired results, but led to an extreme concentration of property, and in Russia this phenomenon, which is common in the process of mass privatization, has taken on an especially large scale. As a result of the transformation of the old ministries and the departmental banks related to them, a powerful financial oligarchy arose. “Property,” writes I. Samson, “is an institution that does not change by any decree, not at once. If the economy tries too hastily to plant private property everywhere through mass privatization, then it will quickly concentrate where there is economic power "

According to T. Weisskopf, in the conditions of Russia, where capital markets are completely undeveloped, labor mobility is limited, it is difficult to imagine that the very mechanism of industrial restructuring, which is highly dependent on the mobility of capital and labor, works. It would be more expedient to create incentives and opportunities for improving the activities of enterprises by the administration and

workers rather than attracting outside shareholders.

The early failure to form a large sector of new enterprises led to significant negative consequences, including making it easier for mafia groups to seize control of a large part of state property. “The main problem today, as in 1992, is the creation of an infrastructure conducive to the development of competition. K. Arrow reminds that “under capitalism, the expansion and even maintenance of the same level of supply often takes the form of new firms entering the industry, rather than the development or simple reproduction of old ones; this applies especially to small and low capital intensive industries. " As for the privatization of heavy industry, this process must be slow, of necessity, but here, too, “the priority task is not the transfer of existing capital assets and enterprises to private hands, but their gradual replacement with new assets and new enterprises.

Thus, one of the urgent tasks of the transition period is to increase the number of enterprises at all levels, to intensify entrepreneurial initiative. According to M. Goldman, instead of quick voucher privatization, efforts should have been directed at stimulating the creation of new enterprises and the formation of a market with an appropriate infrastructure, characterized by transparency, the presence of the rules of the game, the necessary specialists and economic legislation. In this regard, the question arises of creating the necessary entrepreneurial climate in the country, stimulating the development of small and medium-sized businesses, and removing bureaucratic obstacles. Experts note that the state of affairs in this area is far from being satisfactory and there is no reason to expect its improvement, as evidenced by a slowdown in growth and even a reduction in the number of enterprises since the mid-90s, as well as the number of unprofitable enterprises. All this requires improvement and simplification of regulation, licensing, tax system, provision of affordable credit, creation of a network to support small businesses, training programs, business incubators, etc.

Comparing the results of privatization in various countries, J. Kornai notes that the most sad example of the failure of the accelerated privatization strategy is Russia, where all the characteristics of this strategy manifested themselves in an extreme form: the voucher privatization imposed on the country, coupled with massive manipulations in the transfer of property into the hands of managers and close officials ... Under these conditions, instead of "people's capitalism", there actually took place a sharp concentration of the former state property and the development of "an absurd, perverted and extremely unjust form of oligarchic capitalism."

Thus, the discussion of the problems and results of privatization showed that its forcing does not automatically lead to the market behavior of enterprises, and the methods of its implementation actually meant ignoring the principles of social justice. Privatization, especially of large-scale industry, requires extensive preparation, reorganization and restructuring of enterprises. Of great importance in the formation of the market mechanism is the creation of new enterprises, ready to enter the market, which requires appropriate conditions and support for entrepreneurship. At the same time, one should not overestimate the importance of changes in forms of ownership, which are important not in themselves, but as a means of increasing the efficiency and competitiveness of enterprises.

Liberalization

Liberalization of prices was the first point of Boris Yeltsin's program of urgent economic reforms, proposed to the 5th Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR, held in October 1991. The liberalization proposal met with unconditional support from the Congress (878 votes in favor and only 16 against).

In fact, radical liberalization of consumer prices was carried out on January 2, 1992 in accordance with the decree of the President of the RSFSR dated 03.12.1991 No. 297 "On measures to liberalize prices", as a result of which 90% of retail prices and 80% of wholesale prices were exempted from state regulation. At the same time, control over the level of prices for a number of socially significant consumer goods and services (bread, milk, public transport) was left to the state (and for some of them it is still maintained). Initially, mark-ups for such goods were limited, but in March 1992 it became possible to remove these restrictions, which was used by most regions. In addition to price liberalization, since January 1992, a number of other important economic reforms have been implemented, in particular, the liberalization of wages, freedom of retail trade, etc.

Initially, the prospects for price liberalization were in serious doubt, as the ability of market forces to determine the prices of goods was limited by a number of factors. First of all, price liberalization began before privatization, so that the economy was predominantly owned by the state. Second, reforms were initiated at the federal level, while price controls have traditionally been at the local level, and in some cases local authorities have chosen to maintain this control directly, despite the government's refusal to provide subsidies to such regions.

In January 1995, prices for about 30% of goods continued to be regulated in one way or another. For example, the authorities pressured privatized shops using the fact that land, real estate and utilities were still in the hands of the state. Local authorities also created obstacles to trade, for example by prohibiting the export of food to other areas. Third, powerful criminal gangs arose that blocked access to existing markets and collected tribute through racketeering, thereby distorting market pricing mechanisms. Fourth, poor communications and high transportation costs made it difficult for companies and individuals to respond effectively to market signals. Despite these difficulties, in practice, market forces began to play a significant role in pricing, and the imbalance in the economy began to narrow.

Liberalization of prices has become one of the most important steps towards the transition of the country's economy to market principles. According to the authors of the reforms themselves, in particular, Gaidar, thanks to liberalization, the country's stores in a fairly short time were filled with goods, their assortment and quality increased, and the main prerequisites were created for the formation of market management mechanisms in society. As Vladimir Mau, an employee of the Gaidar Institute, wrote, “the main thing that was achieved as a result of the first steps of economic reforms was to overcome the commodity deficit and avert the threat of impending famine from the country in the winter of 1991-1992, as well as ensure the internal convertibility of the ruble”.

Before the reforms began, representatives of the Russian Government argued that price liberalization would lead to their moderate growth - an adjustment between supply and demand. According to the generally accepted point of view, fixed prices for consumer goods were understated in the USSR, which caused increased demand, and this, in turn, - a shortage of goods.

It was assumed that as a result of the correction, the product supply, expressed in new market prices, would be approximately three times higher than the old one, which would ensure economic equilibrium. However, price liberalization was not aligned with monetary policy. As a result of price liberalization, by mid-1992, Russian enterprises were left practically without working capital.

The liberalization of prices led to galloping inflation, depreciation of wages, incomes and savings of the population, an increase in unemployment, as well as an increase in the problem of irregular payment of wages. The combination of these factors with the economic downturn, increased income inequality and unequal distribution of earnings between regions led to a rapid decline in real earnings for a significant part of the population and its impoverishment. In 1998, GDP per capita was 61% of the 1991 level - an effect that came as a surprise to the reformers themselves, who expected the opposite result from price liberalization, but which was observed to a lesser extent in other countries where shock therapy was carried out. ".

Thus, in conditions of almost complete monopolization of production, the liberalization of prices actually led to a change in the bodies that set them: instead of the state committee, the monopoly structures themselves began to deal with this, which resulted in a sharp increase in prices and a simultaneous decrease in production volumes. The liberalization of prices, unaccompanied by the creation of restraining mechanisms, led not to the creation of mechanisms of market competition, but to the establishment of control over the market of organized criminal groups, extracting super profits by gouging prices, moreover, the mistakes made provoked cost hyperinflation, which not only disorganized production, but also led to the depreciation of income and savings of citizens.

2.2 Institutional factors of market reform

market neoclassic institutionalism economic

The formation of a modern, that is, adequate to the challenges of the post-industrial era, system of institutions is the most important prerequisite for achieving the strategic goals of Russia's development. It is necessary to ensure the coordinated and effective development of institutions,

regulating the political, social and economic aspects of the country's development.

The institutional environment necessary for an innovative socially oriented type of development will be formed in the long term in the following areas. First, the political and legal institutions aimed at ensuring the civil and political rights of citizens, as well as the implementation of legislation. We are talking about the protection of basic rights, including the inviolability of the person and property, the independence of the court, the effectiveness of the law enforcement system, and freedom of the media. Secondly, the institutions that ensure the development of human capital. First of all, this concerns education, health care, the pension system and housing. The key problem in the development of these sectors is the implementation of institutional reforms - the development of new rules for their functioning. Third, economic institutions, that is, legislation that ensures the sustainable functioning and development of the national economy. Modern economic legislation should ensure economic growth and structural modernization of the economy. Fourth, development institutions aimed at solving specific systemic problems of economic growth, that is, the rules of the game, aimed not at all participants in economic or political life, but at some of them. Fifth, the system of strategic management, which allows to ensure the harmonious formation and development of these types of institutions and aimed at coordinating budgetary, monetary, structural, regional and social policies in solving systemic internal development problems and responding to external challenges. It includes interconnected programs of institutional transformations, long-term and medium-term forecasts for the development of the economy, science and technology, strategies and programs for the development of key sectors of the economy and regions, a long-term financial plan and a performance budgeting system. The basis for sustainable economic growth is formed by the first type of institutions - guarantees of basic rights.

To increase the efficiency of political and legal institutions, to ensure the implementation of legislation, it is necessary to solve the following problems:

effective protection of private property, the formation in society of an understanding that the ability to ensure the protection of property is one of the criteria for a favorable investment climate and the effectiveness of state power. Particular attention should be paid to the suppression of raider seizures of property;

carrying out judicial reform to ensure the effectiveness and fairness of decisions taken by the court;

creation of conditions under which it would be beneficial for Russian companies to remain in Russian jurisdiction, and not to register in offshores and use the Russian judicial system to resolve disputes, including disputes over property issues;

the fight against corruption not only in government bodies, but also in government institutions that provide social services to the population, and in large state-related economic structures (natural monopolies). This requires a radical increase in transparency, a change in the motivation system, countering the criminal use of official positions by civil servants in their personal interests in order to promote business, creating unreasonable administrative restrictions on business, increasing liability for offenses related to corruption and abuse of office, including on the basis of indirect signs of corruption;

significant improvement in access to information on the activities of state bodies;

adoption of a special program to ensure openness of the activities of state and municipal authorities, including a clear definition of the mechanisms for obtaining complete information by citizens and enterprises about the decisions they make, as well as careful regulation of the activities of authorities;

preventing excessive government interference in economic activity;

improvement of the control and supervision system, which implies reducing administrative restrictions on entrepreneurial activity, ensuring effective regulation of the powers of control (supervision) bodies and increasing guarantees for the protection of the rights of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs during state control (supervision);

exclusion of the possibility of using checks and inspections to stop a business and destroy a competitor; increasing the efficiency of state property management, including a gradual reduction in the use of the institution of economic management;

reduction of the volume of property in state and municipal ownership, taking into account the tasks of ensuring the powers of state authorities and local self-government bodies;

improving the quality and availability of public services provided by executive authorities. Relevant measures include clear regulation of the procedure for their provision, implementation of measures aimed at simplifying procedures, reducing transaction and time costs spent by consumers to obtain them, as well as introducing procedures for assessing the quality of services provided by consumers - citizens and entrepreneurs, forming a network of multifunctional centers providing services to the population and providing consumers with access to public services online on the Internet (“electronic government”);

Major institutional shifts must take place in sectors that support human capital development. The development of these sectors, the improvement of the quality of the services they provide, requires not only serious financial resources, but, above all, a significant increase in the efficiency of their functioning. Without deep institutional reforms, expanding investment in human capital will not produce the desired results.

The formation of a modern system of economic institutions involves measures to stimulate competition in the markets for goods and

services, the development of market infrastructure, the solution of many other problems in order to ensure the effective functioning of the market economy. First of all, it is necessary to ensure the development of a competitive environment as a key prerequisite for the formation of incentives for innovation and efficiency growth based on lowering barriers to market entry, demonopolizing the economy, and ensuring a level playing field. For this, it is planned to create a warning and suppression system.

actions of the state and business that restrict competition, increase the efficiency of regulation of natural monopolies, ensure demonopolization and development of competition in the field of limited natural resources, in particular, aquatic biological resources and subsoil areas. An important factor in stimulating competition is the removal of barriers to market entry - simplification of the system of registration of new enterprises,

including the possibility of registering an enterprise via the Internet, while excluding the possibility of creating one-day companies; reduction of licensing procedures required to start a business, replacing licensing procedures with a declaration of conformity with established requirements; replacement of licensing for certain types of activities with compulsory liability insurance, financial guarantees or control by self-regulatory organizations.

One of the most important components of the formalized institutional framework for the vast array of economic exchanges is antitrust laws, which establish the framework for permitted economic activity in areas that are considered to be markets.

It is necessary to form an effective system for managing state property while observing the compliance of the composition of state property with the functions of the state, ensuring transparency of information on the effectiveness of property management, improving the management of state shares in joint-stock companies, increasing the efficiency of the state sector of the economy, as well as established state corporations and large state holdings in strategic industries. It is necessary to implement a number of institutional measures to promote the development of small and medium-sized businesses. Facilitating access for small businesses to purchase and renting real estate, expanding the microcredit system, reducing the number of control and supervisory activities carried out in relation to small businesses, reducing business costs associated with these activities, tightening sanctions against employees of control and supervisory authorities who violate the order conducting inspections, invalidating the results of inspections in case of gross violations during their conduct, a significant reduction in outside procedural inspections by law enforcement agencies.

Currently, the role of development institutions is increasing. The most important task of development institutions is to create conditions for the implementation of long-term investment projects. State corporations occupy a special place among development institutions. They are a transitional form designed to help consolidate state assets and improve the efficiency of their strategic management. As these problems are resolved, as well as the strengthening of the institutions of corporate regulation and the financial market, a part of state corporations should be corporatized with subsequent full or partial privatization, and a part of state corporations created for a certain period should cease to exist. The effectiveness of institutional changes depends on the extent to which the adopted legislative norms are supported by the effectiveness of their application in practice. In Russia, a significant gap has formed between formal norms (laws) and informal norms (real behavior of economic entities), which is expressed in a low level of implementation of legislation and a tolerant attitude towards such non-compliance on the part of the authorities, business and the general population, that is, in legal nihilism.

Conclusion

Neoclassicism and institutionalism are the basic theories of the development of economic relations. The course work revealed the relevance of these theories in the modern economy of various countries, and how to effectively apply them in practice, to maximize profits and reduce transaction costs. The ideas about the origin, formation and modern development of these economic theories have been obtained. I also described the similarities and differences between theories and the features of each of them. Methods for studying economic processes and phenomena were considered from the perspective of neoclassicism and institutionalism. Based on the tasks set, it was possible to reveal the role of these economic theories for the development of modern economic systems and to determine the specifics of each direction of economic theory for making subsequent economic decisions. It is necessary to understand that these theories are the basis for the effective development of the organization, and the application of various features of the theories will allow the company to develop evenly and in the long term. An idea of ​​the advantages and disadvantages of economic theories, their application in practice and the role of these areas in the functioning of the economy is obtained.

The course work examined the privatization in Russia on the basis of the neoclassical direction, and the results of its implementation. It can be concluded that privatization had more negative features than positive, due to the rash policy of the state and the absence of a number of factors under which it could be successful. They also considered the institutions of priority development of Russia in the long term, and what reforms need to be carried out to develop an effective, innovative economy in Russia.

The findings of the study suggest that neoclassicism and institutionalism, as the theory of economic relations, play an important role in the functioning of the economy, both at the macro and micro levels, and the better the principles of these theories are understood, the more efficiently resources will be used. accordingly, an increase in the income of the organization.

List of sources used

1. Institutional economics: a new institutional economic theory: Textbook. Under the general ed. Doctor of Economics, prof. A.A. Auzana. - M .: INFRA-M, 2010 .-- 416 p.

Brendeleva E.A. Neoinstitutional economic theory: textbook. allowance / E.A. Brendelev; under. total ed. A.V. Sidorovich. - Moscow: Business and Service, 2006 .-- 352 p.

3. Institutional Economics: Textbook. / Under total. Ed. A. Oleinik. - M .: INFRA-M, 2005.

B.V. Korneichuk Institutional economics: textbook for universities / B.V. Korneichuk. - M .: Gardariki, 2007.255 s.

Odintsova M.I. Institutional economics [Text]: textbook. allowance / M.I. Odintsova; State un-t? High School of Economics. ? 2nd ed. ? Moscow: Ed. House of the State University Higher School of Economics, 2008.? 397 s.

Tambovtsev V.L. Law and economic theory: Textbook. allowance. ? M .: INFRA - M, 2005.? 224 s.

Becker G.S. Human Behavior: An Economic Approach. Selected works on economic theory: Per. from English / Comp., scientific. ed., after. R.I. Kapelyushnikov; foreword M.I. Levin. - M .: GU HSE, 2003.

Veblen T. Theory of the leisure class. Moscow: Progress, 1984.

Goldman M.A. What is needed to create a normal market economy in Russia // Probl. theory and practice exercise. - M., 1998. - No. 2. - S. 19-24. 10. Goldman M.A. Privatization in Russia: is it possible to correct the mistakes made? // Ibid. - 2000. - No. 4. - S. 22-27.

11. Inshakov OV Institution and Institute: Problems of Categorical Differentiation and Integration // Economic Science of Contemporary Russia. - 2010. - No. 3.

Coase R. Firm, Market and Law. M .: Delo: Catallaxy, 1993.

13. Kleiner G. Systemic resource of the economy // Questions of economy. - 2011. - No. 1.

Kirdina S.G. Institutional changes and the Curie principle // Economic science of modern Russia. - 2011. - No. 1.

Lebedeva N.N. New institutional economic theory: Lectures, tests, assignments: Textbook. - Volgograd: Volgograd Scientific Publishing House, 2005.

North D. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Moscow: Beginnings, 1997.

Orekhovsky P. Maturity of social institutions and the specificity of the foundations of the theory of public choice // Problems of Economics. - 2011. - No. 6.

Tutoring

Need help exploring a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Send a request with the indication of the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

COURSE WORK

Neoclassicism and institutionalism: a comparative analysis

Introduction

Course work is devoted to the study of neoclassicism and institutionalism, both at a theoretical level and in practice. This topic is relevant, in modern conditions of increasing globalization of socio-economic processes, there are general patterns and trends in the development of economic entities, including organizations. Organizations as economic systems are studied from the perspective of various schools and directions of Western economic thought. Methodological approaches in Western economic thought are represented mainly by two leading directions: neoclassical and institutional.

Objectives of studying the course work:

Get an idea of ​​the origin, formation and modern development of neoclassical and institutional economic theory;

Get acquainted with the main research programs of neoclassicism and institutionalism;

Show the essence and specifics of the neoclassical and institutional methodology for the study of economic phenomena and processes;

Objectives of studying the course work:

To give a holistic view of the basic concepts of neoclassical and institutional economic theory, to show their role and significance for the development of modern models of economic systems;

Understand and assimilate the role and importance of institutions in the development of micro - and macrosystems;

Acquire the skills of economic analysis of law, politics, psychology, ethics, traditions, habits, organizational culture and codes of economic conduct;

Determine the specifics of the neoclassical and institutional environment and take it into account when making economic decisions.

The subject of study of neoclassical and institutional theory is economic relations and interactions, and the object is neoclassicism and institutionalism as the basis of economic policy. When selecting information for the course work, the views of various scholars were considered in order to understand how ideas about neoclassical and institutional theory have changed. Also, when studying the topic, the statistical data of economic journals were used, the literature of the latest editions was used. Thus, the information of the course work is compiled using reliable sources of information and provides objective knowledge on the topic: neoclassicism and institutionalism: a comparative analysis.

1 . Theoreticalprovisions of neoclassicism and institutionalism

1.1 Neoclassical economics

The emergence and evolution of neoclassicism

Neoclassical economics emerged in the 1870s. The neoclassical direction investigates the behavior of an economic person (consumer, entrepreneur, employee), who seeks to maximize income and minimize costs. The main categories of analysis are limit values. Neoclassical economists have developed the theory of marginal utility and the theory of marginal productivity, the theory of general economic equilibrium, according to which the mechanism of free competition and market pricing ensures a fair distribution of income and full use of economic resources, the economic theory of welfare, the principles of which form the basis of the modern theory of public finance (P Samuelson), the theory of rational expectations, etc. In the second half of the 19th century, along with Marxism, neoclassical economic theory emerged and developed. Of all its many representatives, the most famous was the English scientist Alfred Marshall (1842-1924). He was a professor and head of the Department of Political Economy at the University of Cambridge. A. Marshall summarized the results of new economic research in the fundamental work "Principles of Economic Theory" (1890). In his works A. Marshall relied both on the ideas of classical theory and on the ideas of marginalism. Marginalism (from the English marginal - extreme, extreme) is a trend in economic theory that arose in the second half of the 19th century. Marginal economists used marginal values ​​in their studies, such as marginal utility (utility of the last, additional unit of good), marginal productivity (output produced by the last employee hired). These concepts were used by them in the theory of prices, the theory of wages and in explaining many other economic processes and phenomena. In his theory of prices, A. Marshall relies on the concept of supply and demand. The price of a good is determined by the ratio of supply and demand. The demand for a good is based on subjective assessments of the marginal utility of a good by consumers (buyers). The supply of goods is based on production costs. A manufacturer cannot sell at a price that does not cover his production costs. If the classical economic theory considered the formation of prices from the standpoint of the producer, then the neoclassical theory considers pricing both from the standpoint of the consumer (demand) and from the standpoint of the producer (supply). Neoclassical economic theory, like the classics, proceeds from the principle of economic liberalism, the principle of free competition. But in their studies, neoclassicists place more emphasis on the study of applied practical problems, to a greater extent they use quantitative analysis and mathematics than qualitative (meaningful, cause-and-effect). The greatest attention is paid to the problems of efficient use of limited resources at the microeconomic level, at the level of an enterprise and a household. Neoclassical economic theory is one of the foundations of many areas of modern economic thought.

The main representatives of neoclassicism

A. Marshall: Principles of Political Economy

It was he who introduced the term "economics" into everyday life, thereby emphasizing his understanding of the subject of economics. In his opinion, this term reflects research more fully. Economic science investigates the economic aspects of the conditions of social life, the incentives for economic activity. Being a purely applied science, it cannot ignore questions of practice; but questions of economic policy are not its subject. Economic life must be viewed outside of political influences, outside of government intervention. There were discussions among economists about what is the source of the cost of labor costs, utility, production factors. Marshall turned the controversy into a different plane, coming to the conclusion that one should not look for a source of value, but investigate the factors that determine prices, their level, and dynamics. The concept, developed by Marshall, was his Roma compromise between different areas of economic science. The main idea put forward by him is to switch efforts from theoretical disputes around value to studying the problems of the interaction of supply and demand as the forces that determine the processes taking place in the market. Economic science studies not only the nature of wealth, but also the incentives for economic activity. "Scales of the Economist" - monetary values. Money measures the intensity of incentives that prompt a person to take action and make decisions. The analysis of the behavior of individuals forms the basis of the "Principles of Political Economy". The author's attention is focused on examining the specific mechanism of economic activity. The mechanism of a market economy is studied primarily at the micro level, and subsequently at the macro level. The postulates of the neoclassical school, at the origin of which was Marshall, represent the theoretical basis of applied research.

J. B. Clarke: Theory of Income Distribution

The classical school considered the problem of distribution as an integral element of the general theory of value. The prices of goods were made up of the shares of the remuneration of production factors. Each factor had its own theory. According to the views of the Austrian school, the incomes of the factors were formed as derived quantities from the market prices of the products produced. An attempt to find a common basis for the value of both factors and products on the basis of uniform principles was undertaken by economists of the neoclassical school. American economist John Bates Clark set out to "show that the distribution of social income is governed by social law and that this law, if it acted without resistance, would give each factor of production the amount that this factor creates." Already in the formulation of the goal there is a summary - each factor gets the share of the product that it creates. All subsequent contents of the book provide a detailed rationale for this summary - argument, illustrations, comments. In an effort to find a principle of income distribution that would determine the share of each factor in the product, Clark uses the concept of diminishing utility, which he transfers to factors of production. In this case, the theory of consumer behavior, the theory of consumer demand is replaced by the theory of the choice of production factors. Every entrepreneur seeks to find such a combination of applied factors, which provides a minimum cost and maximum income. Clark's reasoning is as follows. Two factors are taken, if one of them is taken unchanged, then the use of the other factor, as it quantitatively increases, will bring less and less income. Labor brings wages to its owner, capital - interest. If additional workers are hired with the same capital, then income increases, but not in proportion to the increase in the number of new workers.

A. Pigou: The Economic Theory of Welfare

The economic theory of A. Pigou considers the problem of the distribution of the national income, in the terminology of Pigou - the national dividend. He refers to it "everything that people buy with their monetary income, as well as the services provided to a person by the dwelling that he owns and in which he lives." However, services rendered to oneself and in the household and the use of publicly owned items are not included in this category.

The national dividend is the flow of goods and services produced in a society over the course of a year. In other words, this is the share of society's income that can be expressed in money: goods and services that make up final consumption. If Marshall appears before us as a taxonomist and theorist striving to cover the entire system of relations of the "ekhnomix", then Pigou was mainly engaged in the analysis of individual problems. Along with theoretical questions, he was interested in economic policy. In particular, he was interested in the question of how to reconcile private and public interests, to combine private and public costs. Pigou's focus is on the theory of public welfare, it is designed to answer, what is the common good? How is it achieved? How is the redistribution of benefits carried out from the standpoint of improving the position of members of society; especially the poorest. The construction of the railway benefits not only those who built and operates, but also the owners of nearby land plots. As a result of the construction of the railway, the price of land located near it will inevitably age. Owners of land participants, although not involved in construction, benefit from the rise in land prices. The overall national dividend is also growing. The criterion that must be taken into account is the dynamics of market prices. According to Pigou, "the main indicator is not the product itself or material goods, but in relation to the conditions of a market economy, market prices." But the construction of a railway can be accompanied by negative and very undesirable consequences, a deterioration of the ecological situation. People will suffer from noise, smoke, debris.

"Iron" harms crops, reduces yields, and undermines the quality of products.

The use of new technology often creates difficulties and creates problems that require additional costs.

Limits of applicability of the neoclassical approach

1. Neoclassical theory is based on unrealistic assumptions and limitations, and, therefore, it uses models inadequate to economic practice. Coase called this state of affairs in neoclassicism "chalkboard economics."

2. Economic science expands the range of phenomena (for example, such as ideology, law, norms of behavior, family) that can be successfully analyzed from the point of view of economic science. This process was called "economic imperialism". The leading representative of this direction is the Nobel laureate Harry Becker. But for the first time, Ludwig von Mises wrote about the need to create a general science studying human action, who proposed the term "praxeology" for this.

3. Within the framework of neoclassicism, there are practically no theories that satisfactorily explain the dynamic changes in the economy, the importance of study, which became relevant against the background of historical events of the XX century

Rigid core and neoclassical protective belt

Hard core :

1. Stable preferences that are endogenous;

2. Rational choice (maximizing behavior);

3. Market equilibrium and general equilibrium in all markets.

Protective belt:

1. Ownership rights remain unchanged and clearly defined;

2. The information is completely accessible and complete;

3. Individuals satisfy their needs through exchange, which takes place without cost, taking into account the initial distribution.

1.2 Institutional economics

Institute concept. The role of institutions in the functioning of the economy

The concept of the institution was borrowed by economists from the social sciences, in particular from sociology. An institution is a set of roles and statuses designed to meet a specific need. Definitions of institutions can also be found in works on political philosophy and social psychology. For example, the category of institution is one of the central in the work of John Rawls "Theory of Justice". Institutions are understood as a public system of rules that define the position and position with the corresponding rights and responsibilities, power and immunity, and the like. These rules specify certain forms of action as permitted and others as prohibited, punishing certain actions and protecting others when violence occurs. As examples, or more general social practices, we can cite games, rituals, courts and parliaments, markets and property systems.

In economic theory, the concept of an institution was first included in the analysis by Thorstein Veblen. Institutions are a common way of thinking about the particular relationship between society and the individual and the particular functions they perform; and the system of society's life, which is made up of the totality of those acting at a certain time or at any moment in the development of any society, can, from the psychological point of view, be characterized in general terms as a prevailing spiritual position or a widespread idea of ​​the way of life in society.

Veblen also understood by institutions:

Behavior habits;

The structure of the production or economic mechanism;

The current system of social life.

Another founder of institutionalism, John Commons, defines an institution as follows: an institution is a collective action to control, liberate, and expand individual action.

Another classic of institutionalism, Wesley Mitchell, has the following definition: institutions are dominant and highly standardized social habits. Currently, within the framework of modern institutionalism, the most common is the interpretation of institutions by Douglas North: Institutions are rules, mechanisms that ensure their implementation, and norms of behavior that structure repetitive interactions between people.

The economic actions of an individual do not take place in an isolated space, but in a certain society. And therefore it is of great importance how the society will react to them. Thus, transactions that are acceptable and profitable in one location may not necessarily be worthwhile even under similar conditions elsewhere. An example of this is the restrictions imposed on the economic behavior of a person by various religious cults. In order to avoid the coordination of many external factors influencing success and the very possibility of making a particular decision, within the framework of the economic and social orders, schemes or algorithms of behavior are developed that are most effective under these conditions. These schemes and algorithms or matrices of the behavior of individuals are nothing more than institutions.

Traditional institutionalism

The "old" institutionalism, as an economic trend, emerged at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. It was closely associated with the historical direction in economic theory, with the so-called historical and new historical school (Liszt F., Schmoler G., Bretano L., Bucher K.). From the very beginning of its development, institutionalism was characterized by the upholding of the idea of ​​social control and the intervention of society, mainly the state, in economic processes. This was the legacy of the historical school, whose representatives not only denied the existence of stable deterministic relationships and laws in the economy, but also advocated the idea that the welfare of society could be achieved on the basis of strict state regulation of the economy of a nationalist persuasion. The most prominent representatives of the "Old Institutionalism" are: Thorstein Veblen, John Commons, Wesley Mitchell, John Galbraith. Despite a significant range of problems covered in the works of these economists, they did not manage to form their own unified research program. As Coase noted, the work of the American institutionalists led nowhere because they lacked the theory to organize the mass of descriptive material. The old institutionalism criticized the provisions that make up the "hard core of neoclassicism." In particular, Veblen rejected the concept of rationality and the corresponding maximization principle as fundamental in explaining the behavior of economic agents. The object of analysis is institutions, not human interactions in a space with limitations imposed by institutions. Also, the works of the old institutionalists are distinguished by significant interdisciplinarity, being, in fact, a continuation of sociological, legal, statistical research in their application to economic problems.

Neoinstitutionalism

Modern neoinstitutionalism has its origins in the works of Ronald Coase "The Nature of the Firm", "The Problem of Social Costs." The neo-institutionalists attacked in the first place the provisions of neoclassicism, which constitute its defensive core.

1) First, the premise that exchange occurs without cost has been criticized. A criticism of this position can be found in the early works of Coase. Although, it should be noted that Menger wrote about the possibility of the existence of exchange costs and their influence on the decisions of the exchanging subjects in his "Foundations of Political Economy". Economic exchange occurs only when each of its participants, carrying out the act of exchange, receives some increase in value to the value of the existing set of goods. This is proved by Karl Menger in his work "Foundations of Political Economy", proceeding from the assumption of the existence of two participants in the exchange. The concept of transaction costs contradicts the thesis of neoclassical theory that the costs of functioning of the market mechanism are equal to zero. This assumption made it possible not to take into account the influence of various institutions in the economic analysis. Therefore, if transaction costs are positive, it is necessary to take into account the influence of economic and social institutions on the functioning of the economic system.

2) Secondly, recognizing the existence of transaction costs, it becomes necessary to revise the thesis about the availability of information (information asymmetry). The recognition of the thesis about the incompleteness and imperfection of information opens up new prospects for economic analysis, for example, in the study of contracts.

3) Third, the thesis of the neutrality of the distribution and specification of property rights has been revised. Research in this direction served as a starting point for the development of such directions of institutionalism as the theory of property rights and economics.

organizations. Within the framework of these areas, subjects of economic activity “economic organizations have ceased to be regarded as“ black boxes ”. Within the framework of "modern" institutionalism, attempts are also made to modify or even change the elements of the rigid core of neoclassicism. First of all, this is the premise of neoclassicism about rational choice. In institutional economics, classical rationality is modified by making assumptions about bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior. Despite the differences, almost all representatives of neoinstitutionalism consider institutions through their influence on the decisions made by economic agents. In doing so, the following fundamental tools related to the human model are used: methodological individualism, utility maximization, bounded rationality, and opportunistic behavior. Some representatives of modern institutionalism go even further and question the very premise of utility-maximizing behavior of the economic person, suggesting its replacement with the principle of satisfaction. In accordance with the classification of Tran Eggertsson, representatives of this direction form their own direction in institutionalism - a new institutional economy, representatives of which can be considered O. Williamson and G. Simon. Thus, the distinction between neoinstitutionalism and the new institutional economy can be drawn depending on which preconditions are subject to replacement or modification within their framework - the "hard core" or "protective belt".

The main representatives of neo-institutionalism are: R. Coase, O. Williamson, D. North, A. Alchian, Simon G., L. Thévenot, Menard K., Buchanan J., Olson M., R. Posner, G. Demsetz, S. Pejovich, T. Eggertsson.

1.3 Comparison of neoclassicism and andinstitutionalism

Common to all neoinstitutionalists is the following: first, that social institutions matter, and second, that they lend themselves to analysis using standard microeconomic tools. In the 1960-1970s. a phenomenon called by G. Becker "economic imperialism" began. It was during this period that economic concepts: maximization, equilibrium, efficiency, etc., began to be actively used in such areas related to the economy as education, family relations, health care, crime, politics, etc. This led to the fact that basic economic categories of neoclassicism received deeper interpretation and wider application.

Each theory consists of a core and a protective layer. Neo-institutionalism is no exception. He, like neoclassicism as a whole, considers the following to be among the main prerequisites:

§ methodological individualism;

§ the concept of an economic person;

§ activity as an exchange.

However, in contrast to neoclassicism, these principles began to be carried out more consistently.

1) Methodological individualism In the face of limited resources, each of us is faced with the choice of one of the available alternatives. The methods of analyzing the market behavior of an individual are universal. They can be successfully applied to any of the areas where a person must make a choice.

The basic premise of neoinstitutional theory is that people act in any field in pursuit of their personal interests, and that there is no insurmountable line between business and the social sphere or politics. 2) The concept of economic man . The second premise of neoinstitutional choice theory is the concept of the “economic man”. According to this concept, a person in a market economy identifies his preferences with a product. He seeks to make decisions that maximize the value of his utility function. His behavior is rational. The rationality of the individual has a universal meaning in this theory. This means that all people are guided in their activities primarily by the economic principle, i.e. compare the marginal benefits and marginal costs (and, above all, the benefits and costs associated with making decisions): However, in contrast to neoclassicism, which considers mainly physical (scarcity of resources) and technological limitations (lack of knowledge, practical skill, etc.) in the neoinstitutional theory, transaction costs are also considered, i.e. costs associated with the exchange of property rights. This happened because any activity is viewed as an exchange.

3) Activity as exchange. Proponents of neoinstitutional theory consider any area by analogy with the commodity market. The state, for example, with this approach is an arena of competition between people for influence on decision-making, for access to the distribution of resources, for places in the hierarchical ladder. However, the state is a market of a special kind. Its members have unusual property rights: voters can elect representatives to the highest bodies of the state, deputies - to pass laws, officials - to monitor their implementation. Voters and politicians are treated as individuals exchanging votes and campaign promises. It is important to emphasize that neoinstitutionalists are more realistic about the peculiarities of this exchange, given that people have limited rationality, and decision-making is associated with risk and uncertainty. Plus, you don't always have to make the best decisions. Therefore, institutionalists compare the costs of decision-making not with a situation that is considered exemplary in microeconomics (perfect competition), but with those real alternatives that exist in practice. This approach can be supplemented by the analysis of collective action, which involves the consideration of phenomena and processes from the point of view of the interaction of not one individual, but a whole group of people. People can be grouped according to social, property, religious, or party affiliation. At the same time, institutionalists can even deviate somewhat from the principle of methodological individualism, assuming that the group can be considered as the final indivisible object of analysis, with its own utility function, limitations, etc. However, it seems more rational to approach the consideration of a group as a combination of several individuals with their own utility functions and interests.

The institutional approach occupies a special place in the system of theoretical economic directions. Unlike the neoclassical approach, it focuses not so much on the analysis of the results of the behavior of economic agents, but on this behavior itself, its forms and methods. Thus, the identity of the theoretical object of analysis and historical reality is achieved.

Institutionalism is characterized by the predominance of explaining any processes, rather than predicting them, as in neoclassical theory. Institutional models are less formalized, therefore, within the framework of institutional forecasting, many more different predictions can be made.

The institutional approach deals with the analysis of a specific situation, which leads to more generalized results. Analyzing a specific economic situation, institutionalists compare not with the ideal, as in neoclassicism, but with another, real situation.

Thus, the institutional approach is more practical and closer to reality. Institutional economy models are more flexible and able to transform depending on the situation. Despite the fact that institutionalism does not tend to be engaged in forecasting, the importance of this theory is by no means diminished.

It should be noted that recently more and more economists are inclined towards the institutional approach in the analysis of economic reality. And this is justified, since it is the institutional analysis that makes it possible to achieve the most reliable, close to reality results in the study of the economic system. In addition, institutional analysis is an analysis of the qualitative side of all phenomena.

Thus, G. Simon notes that “as economic theory expands beyond its key area of ​​interest - the theory of price, which deals with the quantities of goods and money, there is a shift from purely quantitative analysis, where the central role is assigned to the equalization of limiting values, towards more qualitative institutional analysis, where discrete alternative structures are compared. And, carrying out a qualitative analysis, it is easier to understand how the development takes place, which, as it was found out earlier, is precisely qualitative changes. Having studied the development process, one can more confidently pursue a positive economic policy. "

In the theory of human capital, relatively little attention is paid to institutional aspects, especially the mechanisms of interaction between the institutional environment and human capital in an innovative economy. The static approach of neoclassical theory to the explanation of economic phenomena does not allow explaining the real processes taking place in the transitional economies of a number of countries, accompanied by a negative impact on the reproduction of human capital. The institutional approach has such an opportunity by explaining the mechanism of institutional dynamics and building theoretical constructions of the mutual influence of the institutional environment and human capital.

With sufficient developments in the field of institutional problems of the functioning of the national economy, in the modern economic domestic and foreign literature, there are practically no comprehensive studies of the reproduction of human capital based on the institutional approach.

The influence of socio-economic institutions on the formation of the productive abilities of individuals and their further movement along the stages of the reproductive process has been poorly studied. In addition, the issues of the formation of the institutional system of society, the identification of trends in its functioning and development, as well as the impact of these trends on the quality level of human capital, need serious study. In defining the essence of the institution, T. Veblen proceeded from two types of phenomena that affect the behavior of people. On the one hand, institutions are "habitual ways of responding to stimuli that are created by changing circumstances", on the other hand, institutions are "special ways of the existence of society, which form a special system of social relations."

The neoinstitutional direction considers the concept of institutions in a different way, interpreting them as norms of economic behavior that arise directly from the interaction of individuals.

They form a framework, limitations for human activities. D. North defines institutions as formal rules, agreements reached, internal restrictions on activities, certain characteristics of coercion to fulfill them, embodied in legal norms, traditions, informal rules, and cultural stereotypes.

The mechanism for ensuring the effectiveness of the institutional system is especially important. The degree to which the achievement of the goals facing the institutional system is consistent with the decisions of individuals depends on the effectiveness of coercion. Coercion, D. North notes, is carried out through the internal restrictions of the individual, the fear of punishment for violating the relevant norms, through state violence and social sanctions. It follows from this that formal and informal institutions are involved in the implementation of coercion.

The functioning of various institutional forms contributes to the formation of the institutional system of society. Therefore, the main object of optimization of the human capital reproduction process should be recognized not the organizations themselves, but socio-economic institutions as norms, rules and mechanisms for their implementation, changing and improving which can achieve the desired result.

2 . Neoclassics and Institutionalism as the Theoretical Foundations of Market Reforms

2.1 Neoclassical scenario of market reforms in Russia and its consequences

Since the neoclassicists believe that state intervention in the economy is not effective, and therefore should be minimal or absent, consider privatization in Russia in the 1990s. Many experts, primarily supporters of the Washington Consensus and shock therapy, considered privatization the core of the entire reform program, called for its large-scale implementation and the use of the experience of Western countries, justifying the need for the simultaneous introduction of a market system and the transformation of state-owned enterprises into private ones. At the same time, one of the main arguments in favor of accelerated privatization was the assertion that private enterprises are always more efficient than state ones, therefore, privatization should be the most important means of redistributing resources, improving management and generally increasing the efficiency of the economy. However, they understood that privatization would face certain difficulties. Among them, the lack of market infrastructure, in particular the capital market, and the underdevelopment of the banking sector, lack of sufficient investment, managerial and entrepreneurial skills, resistance from managers and employees, problems of "nomenclature privatization", imperfection of the legislative framework, including in the field of taxation. Proponents of vigorous privatization noted that it is being carried out in an environment of high inflation and low growth rates, leading to massive unemployment. They also pointed out the inconsistency of reforms and the lack of clear guarantees and conditions for the implementation of property rights, the need to reform the banking sector, the pension system, and create an effective stock market. The opinion of many experts on the need for preconditions for successful privatization, namely the implementation of macroeconomic reforms and the creation of a business culture in the country, is important. This group of specialists is characterized by the opinion that it is expedient in the conditions of Russia to attract widespread Western investors, creditors and consultants for the successful implementation of measures in the field of privatization. In the opinion of many experts, in conditions of a shortage of private capital, the choice boiled down to: a) finding a form of redistribution of state property between citizens; b) the choice of a few owners of private capital (often acquired illegally); c) recourse to foreign capital subject to restrictive measures. Privatization "according to Chubais" is more likely denationalization than real privatization. Privatization was supposed to create a large class of private owners, and instead, the "richest monsters" appeared, forming an alliance with the nomenclature. The role of the state remains excessive, producers still have more incentives to steal than to produce, the monopoly of producers has not been eliminated, and small business is developing very weakly. American experts A. Shleifer and R. Vishny, based on their study of the state of affairs at the initial stage of privatization, characterized it as “spontaneous”. They noted that property rights were informally redistributed among a limited number of institutional actors, such as the party and state apparatus, line ministries, local authorities, labor collectives and enterprise management. Hence - the inevitability of conflicts, the cause of which lies in the intersection of the control rights of such co-owners, the presence of many subjects of property with indefinite ownership rights.

Real privatization, according to the authors, is the redistribution of control rights over the assets of state-owned enterprises with the obligatory consolidation of the property rights of owners. In this regard, they proposed a large-scale corporatization of enterprises.

It should be noted that the further development of events largely followed this path. Large state-owned enterprises were turned into joint-stock companies, and the process of actual redistribution of property took place.

A voucher system aimed at equal distribution of equity capital among the population may be good, but there should be mechanisms to ensure that equity capital is not concentrated in the hands of the “wealthy minority”. However, in reality, ill-conceived privatization transferred the property of an essentially prosperous country into the hands of a corrupt, politically powerful elite.

Russian mass privatization, which began with the aim of eliminating the old economic power and accelerating the restructuring of enterprises, did not give the desired results, but led to an extreme concentration of property, and in Russia this phenomenon, which is common in the process of mass privatization, has taken on an especially large scale. As a result of the transformation of the old ministries and the departmental banks related to them, a powerful financial oligarchy arose. “Property,” writes I. Samson, “is an institution that does not change by any decree, not at once. If the economy tries too hastily to plant private property everywhere through mass privatization, then it will quickly concentrate where there is economic power "

According to T. Weisskopf, in the conditions of Russia, where capital markets are completely undeveloped, labor mobility is limited, it is difficult to imagine that the very mechanism of industrial restructuring, which is highly dependent on the mobility of capital and labor, works. It would be more expedient to create incentives and opportunities for improving the activities of enterprises by the administration and

workers rather than attracting outside shareholders.

The early failure to form a large sector of new enterprises led to significant negative consequences, including making it easier for mafia groups to seize control of a large part of state property. “The main problem today, as in 1992, is the creation of an infrastructure conducive to the development of competition. K. Arrow reminds that “under capitalism, the expansion and even maintenance of the same level of supply often takes the form of new firms entering the industry, rather than the development or simple reproduction of old ones; this applies especially to small and low capital intensive industries. " As for the privatization of heavy industry, this process must be slow, of necessity, but here, too, “the priority task is not the transfer of existing capital assets and enterprises to private hands, but their gradual replacement with new assets and new enterprises.

Thus, one of the urgent tasks of the transition period is to increase the number of enterprises at all levels, to intensify entrepreneurial initiative. According to M. Goldman, instead of quick voucher privatization, efforts should have been directed at stimulating the creation of new enterprises and the formation of a market with an appropriate infrastructure, characterized by transparency, the presence of the rules of the game, the necessary specialists and economic legislation. In this regard, the question arises of creating the necessary entrepreneurial climate in the country, stimulating the development of small and medium-sized businesses, and removing bureaucratic obstacles. Experts note that the state of affairs in this area is far from being satisfactory and there is no reason to expect its improvement, as evidenced by a slowdown in growth and even a reduction in the number of enterprises since the mid-90s, as well as the number of unprofitable enterprises. All this requires improvement and simplification of regulation, licensing, tax system, provision of affordable credit, creation of a network to support small businesses, training programs, business incubators, etc.

Comparing the results of privatization in various countries, J. Kornai notes that the most sad example of the failure of the accelerated privatization strategy is Russia, where all the characteristics of this strategy manifested themselves in an extreme form: the voucher privatization imposed on the country, coupled with massive manipulations in the transfer of property into the hands of managers and close officials ... Under these conditions, instead of "people's capitalism", there actually took place a sharp concentration of the former state property and the development of "an absurd, perverted and extremely unjust form of oligarchic capitalism."

Thus, the discussion of the problems and results of privatization showed that its forcing does not automatically lead to the market behavior of enterprises, and the methods of its implementation actually meant ignoring the principles of social justice. Privatization, especially of large-scale industry, requires extensive preparation, reorganization and restructuring of enterprises. Of great importance in the formation of the market mechanism is the creation of new enterprises, ready to enter the market, which requires appropriate conditions and support for entrepreneurship. At the same time, one should not overestimate the importance of changes in forms of ownership, which are important not in themselves, but as a means of increasing the efficiency and competitiveness of enterprises.

Liberalization

Liberalization of prices was the first point of Boris Yeltsin's program of urgent economic reforms, proposed to the 5th Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR, held in October 1991. The liberalization proposal met with unconditional support from the Congress (878 votes in favor and only 16 against).

In fact, radical liberalization of consumer prices was carried out on January 2, 1992 in accordance with the decree of the President of the RSFSR dated 03.12.1991 No. 297 "On measures to liberalize prices", as a result of which 90% of retail prices and 80% of wholesale prices were exempted from state regulation. At the same time, control over the level of prices for a number of socially significant consumer goods and services (bread, milk, public transport) was left to the state (and for some of them it is still maintained). Initially, mark-ups for such goods were limited, but in March 1992 it became possible to remove these restrictions, which was used by most regions. In addition to price liberalization, since January 1992, a number of other important economic reforms have been implemented, in particular, the liberalization of wages, freedom of retail trade, etc.

Initially, the prospects for price liberalization were in serious doubt, as the ability of market forces to determine the prices of goods was limited by a number of factors. First of all, price liberalization began before privatization, so that the economy was predominantly owned by the state. Second, reforms were initiated at the federal level, while price controls have traditionally been at the local level, and in some cases local authorities have chosen to maintain this control directly, despite the government's refusal to provide subsidies to such regions.

In January 1995, prices for about 30% of goods continued to be regulated in one way or another. For example, the authorities pressured privatized shops using the fact that land, real estate and utilities were still in the hands of the state. Local authorities also created obstacles to trade, for example by prohibiting the export of food to other areas. Third, powerful criminal gangs arose that blocked access to existing markets and collected tribute through racketeering, thereby distorting market pricing mechanisms. Fourth, poor communications and high transportation costs made it difficult for companies and individuals to respond effectively to market signals. Despite these difficulties, in practice, market forces began to play a significant role in pricing, and the imbalance in the economy began to narrow.

Liberalization of prices has become one of the most important steps towards the transition of the country's economy to market principles. According to the authors of the reforms themselves, in particular, Gaidar, thanks to liberalization, the country's stores in a fairly short time were filled with goods, their assortment and quality increased, and the main prerequisites were created for the formation of market management mechanisms in society. As Vladimir Mau, an employee of the Gaidar Institute, wrote, “the main thing that was achieved as a result of the first steps of economic reforms was to overcome the commodity deficit and avert the threat of impending famine from the country in the winter of 1991-1992, as well as ensure the internal convertibility of the ruble”.

Before the reforms began, representatives of the Russian Government argued that price liberalization would lead to their moderate growth - an adjustment between supply and demand. According to the generally accepted point of view, fixed prices for consumer goods were understated in the USSR, which caused increased demand, and this, in turn, - a shortage of goods.

It was assumed that as a result of the correction, the product supply, expressed in new market prices, would be approximately three times higher than the old one, which would ensure economic equilibrium. However, price liberalization was not aligned with monetary policy. As a result of price liberalization, by mid-1992, Russian enterprises were left practically without working capital.

The liberalization of prices led to galloping inflation, depreciation of wages, incomes and savings of the population, an increase in unemployment, as well as an increase in the problem of irregular payment of wages. The combination of these factors with the economic downturn, increased income inequality and unequal distribution of earnings between regions led to a rapid decline in real earnings for a significant part of the population and its impoverishment. In 1998, GDP per capita was 61% of the 1991 level - an effect that came as a surprise to the reformers themselves, who expected the opposite result from price liberalization, but which was observed to a lesser extent in other countries where shock therapy was carried out. ".

Thus, in conditions of almost complete monopolization of production, the liberalization of prices actually led to a change in the bodies that set them: instead of the state committee, the monopoly structures themselves began to deal with this, which resulted in a sharp increase in prices and a simultaneous decrease in production volumes. The liberalization of prices, unaccompanied by the creation of restraining mechanisms, led not to the creation of mechanisms of market competition, but to the establishment of control over the market of organized criminal groups, extracting super profits by gouging prices, moreover, the mistakes made provoked cost hyperinflation, which not only disorganized production, but also led to the depreciation of income and savings of citizens.

2.2 Institutional factors of market reform

market neoclassic institutionalism economic

The formation of a modern, that is, adequate to the challenges of the post-industrial era, system of institutions is the most important prerequisite for achieving the strategic goals of Russia's development. It is necessary to ensure the coordinated and effective development of institutions,

regulating the political, social and economic aspects of the country's development.

The institutional environment necessary for an innovative socially oriented type of development will be formed in the long term in the following areas. First, the political and legal institutions aimed at ensuring the civil and political rights of citizens, as well as the implementation of legislation. We are talking about the protection of basic rights, including the inviolability of the person and property, the independence of the court, the effectiveness of the law enforcement system, and freedom of the media. Secondly, the institutions that ensure the development of human capital. First of all, this concerns education, health care, the pension system and housing. The key problem in the development of these sectors is the implementation of institutional reforms - the development of new rules for their functioning. Third, economic institutions, that is, legislation that ensures the sustainable functioning and development of the national economy. Modern economic legislation should ensure economic growth and structural modernization of the economy. Fourth, development institutions aimed at solving specific systemic problems of economic growth, that is, the rules of the game, aimed not at all participants in economic or political life, but at some of them. Fifth, the system of strategic management, which allows to ensure the harmonious formation and development of these types of institutions and aimed at coordinating budgetary, monetary, structural, regional and social policies in solving systemic internal development problems and responding to external challenges. It includes interconnected programs of institutional transformations, long-term and medium-term forecasts for the development of the economy, science and technology, strategies and programs for the development of key sectors of the economy and regions, a long-term financial plan and a performance budgeting system. The basis for sustainable economic growth is formed by the first type of institutions - guarantees of basic rights.

To increase the efficiency of political and legal institutions, to ensure the implementation of legislation, it is necessary to solve the following problems:

effective protection of private property, the formation in society of an understanding that the ability to ensure the protection of property is one of the criteria for a favorable investment climate and the effectiveness of state power. Particular attention should be paid to the suppression of raider seizures of property;

carrying out judicial reform to ensure the effectiveness and fairness of decisions taken by the court;

creation of conditions under which it would be beneficial for Russian companies to remain in Russian jurisdiction, and not to register in offshores and use the Russian judicial system to resolve disputes, including disputes over property issues;

the fight against corruption not only in government bodies, but also in government institutions that provide social services to the population, and in large state-related economic structures (natural monopolies). This requires a radical increase in transparency, a change in the motivation system, countering the criminal use of official positions by civil servants in their personal interests in order to promote business, creating unreasonable administrative restrictions on business, increasing liability for offenses related to corruption and abuse of office, including on the basis of indirect signs of corruption;

Similar documents

The place of neoclassicism in the history of economic theory: "old" neoclassicism (1890-1930), "oppositional" neoclassicism (1930-1960), modern neoclassicism (from the 1970s to the present day). Monetarism as the leader of neoclassicism at the end of the 20th century. The crisis of modern neoclassicism.

abstract, added 09/19/2010


Theoretical features of the development of economic thought in Russia in the 20-90s of the twentieth century. Formation of a powerful economic and mathematical direction by domestic scientists. Marginalism, economics (neoclassicism), institutionalism, Keynesianism and monetarism.

term paper, added 12/18/2010


The essence of the process of modernization of economic institutions in Russia. Types of economic theories. Classical and neoclassical theories, institutionalism. Analysis of the system of market institutions based on the techniques and methods of the system-institutional approach.

term paper, added 06/26/2014


The emergence of a new institutional economic theory. Modern neoclassicism. Traditional institutionalism and its representatives. The main directions are the stages of development of a new institutional economic theory. Rational choice model.

term paper, added 09/18/2005


Technocratic theory and doctrine of "absentee property". J. Commons and his institutionalism. Institutional theory of business cycles and money circulation by W. Mitchell. Scientific and technological progress, uneven economic development.

abstract, added 12/25/2012


Directions of modern economic thought. The place of neoclassicism in the history of economic theory. The concept of the "invisible hand of the market". Labor theory of value. Formation of the neoclassical direction. Periods in neoclassicism. The concept of "Pareto optimality".

presentation added on 11/16/2014


Early institutionalism: the main provisions of the theory. Analysis and assessment of the contribution to the development of the concept of C. Hamilton, T. Veblen, J. Commons, W. Mitchell. Economic views of J. Schumpeter, their essence and content, prerequisites for formation and development.

test, added 12/04/2012


Institutional economics, its functions and research methods. The role of institutions in the functioning of the economy. Basic theories of institutional economics. John Commons' economic belief system. Directions of development of this direction in Russia.

abstract added on 05/29/2015


Classification of institutional concepts. Analysis of the directions of institutional analysis. Development and direction of the traditional institutional school, associated mainly with the activities of the scientists of the "Cambridge School" headed by Jeffrey Hodgson.

test, added 01/12/2015


The emergence of institutionalism: concepts, development and representatives of the theory. Institutionalism and other schools. Institutional and sociological direction of Gelbraith. The institutionalism of Gelbraith's thought. Gelbraith's Technocratic Ideas. "New socialism".