Разработка стратегий социально-экономического развития: наука vs идеология

Polterovich, Victor (2017): Разработка стратегий социально-экономического развития: наука vs идеология. Forthcoming in: Journal of the New Economic Association , Vol. 35, No. 3

Abstract

Strategies for socio-economic development in "catching-up" countries are designed on the basis of ideologies dominated in the society and, as a rule, fail. Until recently, economic science could not offer an alternative basis for designing strategies, but over the past twenty years the situation has changed. Nevertheless, scientific results are still weakly demanded by society. In this paper, the conflict between economics and dominant ideology is explored. On the one hand, ideology restrains the development of scientific research, and on the other hand it is changing under their influence. However, these changes are very slow for a number of reasons, analyzed in the paper. Ideology is inevitably connected with the interests of economic agents. The old elite prevents the emergence of a new ideology, since new concepts reveal the mistakes of past projects. In addition, the implementation of new ideas may require institutional changes that weaken the power of existing high-ranking officials. Meanwhile, in modern societies there are no regular mechanisms providing such transformations, and the probability of rational volitional decisions, which confront the dominant ideology, is small.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• English Title: Designing the Strategies for Socio-Economic Development: Science vs. Ideology
• Language: Russian
• Keywords: catching-up development, radicalism, Washington Consensus, gradualism, institutional reform, interim institution
• Subjects: A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A11 - Role of Economics ; Role of Economists ; Market for Economists; B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B5 - Current Heterodox Approaches > B52 - Institutional ; Evolutionary; D - Microeconomics > D0 - General > D02 - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O2 - Development Planning and Policy > O25 - Industrial Policy; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O2 - Development Planning and Policy > O29 - Other; P - Economic Systems > P2 - Socialist Systems and Transitional Economies > P21 - Planning, Coordination, and Reform

References

Абалкин Л., О. Богомолов, В. Макаров и др. (1996). Новая экономическая политика для России. http://www.r-reforms.ru/indexpub276.htm

Аджемоглу Д., Д. А. Робинсон (2015). Почему одни страны богатые, а другие бедные. Происхождение власти, процветания и нищеты. АСТ, Москва, 402 c.

Норт Д., Дж. Уоллис, Б. Вайнгаст (2011). Насилие и социальные порядки. Концептуальные рамки для интерпретации письменной истории человечества. М.: Издательство Института Гайдара, 479 с.

Норт Д., Дж. Уоллис, С. Уэбб, Б. Вайнгаст (2012). В тени насилия: уроки для обществ с ограниченным доступом к политической и экономической деятельности. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 48 с.

Мау В. А., Я. И. Кузьминов (ред.) (2013). Стратегия–2020. Новая модель роста — новая социальная политика. Итоговый доклад о результатах экспертной работы по актуальным проблемам социально-экономической стратегии России на период до 2020 года. М.: Издательский дом «Дело», 15-126.

Полтерович В. М. (2001).Трансплантация экономических институтов. Экономическая наука современной России, №. 3, 24 -50.

Полтерович В. М. (2007). Элементы теории реформ. М.: Экономика.

Полтерович В.М.(2014). Почему реформы терпят неудачу. Журнал НЭА, № 3 (23), 69–173.

Полтерович В. М. (2016). Институты догоняющего развития (к проекту новой модели экономического развития России). Экономические и социальные перемены: факты, тенденции, прогноз. Вып. 5 (47), 34-56.

Стёпин В.С. (1999).Теоретическое знание. М.: Прогресс-Традиция, 390 c. См. также http://spkurdyumov.ru/uploads/2013/09/steeeppin.pdf , с. 24.

Указ Президента Российской Федерации от 30.06.2016 г. № 306 «О Совете при Президенте Российской Федерации по стратегическому развитию и приоритетным проектам». http://www.kremlin.ru/acts/bank/40945

Chang H.-J. (2002). Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective. London: Anthem Press, 196 pp.

Diesing P. (1982). Science and Ideology in the Policy Sciences. New York: Aldine, 460 pp. 

Gauchat G. (2012). Politicization of Science in the Public Sphere: A Study of Public Trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review 77(2), 167– 187.

Haro de S. (2013). Science and Philosophy: A Love-Hate Relationship. Talk delivered at the conference Rethinking Liberal Education, Amsterdam University College, June 15. 16 pp. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.1244.pdf

Martin B. (1988).The Economy. Chapter 3 in: Solsten Е. and S. W. Meditz (eds). Spain:A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 135-204. http://countrystudies.us/spain/51.htm

Russell B. (1912).The Problems of Philosophy. http://www.naturalthinker.net/trl/texts/Russell,Bertrand/Philosophy/(ebook%20-%20pdf%20-%20Philosophy)%20Russell,%20Bertrand%20-%20The%20Problems%20of%20Philosophy.pdf

Russian Federation (2016). IMF Country Report No. 16/229. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2016/cr16229.pdf

Rodrik D. (2017). Economics Rules. The Rights and Wrongs of the Dismal Science. New York, London: W. W. Norton & Company. 162 pp.

Rubinstein А. (2017). Comments on Economic Models, Economics, and Economists: Remarks on Economics Rules by Dani Rodrik. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(1), 162–172.

Schumpeter J. (2008). Science and Ideology. In: D. M. Hausman. The Philosophy of Economics. An Anthology. Third Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 207-221.

Stiglitz J. E. (2008). Is there a Post-Washington Consensus Consensus? In: N. Serra and J. E. Stiglitz (eds).The Washington Consensus Reconsidered: Towards a New Global Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 41–56.

Tidemann N., W. Vickrey,  М. Gaffney et al. (1990). Open letter to Mikhail Gorbachev. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Open_letter_to_Mikhail_Gorbachev_(1990)