• M. Nikitin, A. Yurko — Search Theories of Markets (Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics 2010)
• Ch. Pissarides — The Unemployment Volatility Puzzle: Is Wage Stickiness the Answer?
• G. Kleiner — System Resource of Economy
• N. Drozdova — In Search of a New Methodology: Comparative and Historical Institutional Analysis in the Work of Avner Greif

• A. Chubais — Innovation Economy in Russia: What to Do?
• A. Shilov — Innovation Economy: Science, Government, and Business
• V. Roud, K. Fursov — The Role of Statistics in the Debate on Science, Technology, and Innovation
• A. Varshavsky — Problems of Science and Its Effectiveness

Abstracts

The crisis of 2008—2009 gave start to a new phase of budgetary policy in Russia. Despite the fact that at present the state of Russian budget seems much better than in most of developed countries, high dependence on oil and gas tax revenues and revealed trends in the structure of budget liabilities point out high persistence risks of budget imbalance in the long run. Reinsuring fiscal and macroeconomic stability requires some urgent and important reforms both in tax and budgetary policy.

The article estimates the effectiveness and adequacy of existing instruments and measures to ensure fiscal sustainability in Russia. Major shocks to Russia’s federal budget under conditions of the global crisis are indicated. The author recommends to return to the fiscal rules that promote fiscal sustainability.

The author analyzes factors that led to a deeper fall in output and profitability in the real sector of the Russian economy in comparison with other segments during the acute phase of the financial crisis. It is argued that some contradictions in the government anti-recession policy, activities of the financial sector and natural monopolies lead to pumping out added value created in manufacturing and agriculture, increase symptoms of the «Dutch disease», etc. It is shown that it may threaten the balanced development of the Russian economy, and a set of measures is suggested to minimize these tendencies and create a basis for the state modernization policy.

The article reviews the search and matching methodology developed by Peter Diamond, Dale Mortensen, and Christopher Pissarides, who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 2010. The main focus is on the applications of this methodology to the analysis of labor market. The article shows the limitations of the Walrasian approach to modeling labor market, provides an example of a simplified stylized search model and discusses briefly the contribution of each laureate.

The author discusses the failure of the canonical search and matching model to explain the cyclical volatility in the job finding rate. The author — the Nobel Prize winner in economics in 2010 — shows that job creation in the model is influenced by wages in new matches. He summarizes microeconometric evidence and finds that wages in new matches are volatile and consistent with the model’s key predictions. Therefore, explanations of the unemployment volatility puzzle have to preserve the cyclical volatility of wages. The author discusses a modification of the model, based on fixed matching costs, that can increase cyclical unemployment volatility and is consistent with wage flexibility in new matches.

The results of development of the new economic systems theory are applied to the problem of investigating resources of economy. It is shown that under the traditional approach to an economic resource as a totality of labor, capital, natural resource and entrepreneurial activity the forces, which connect these resources in systems capable to productive economic activities, are often left outside the analysis. That is why the concept of a system resource of economy as a totality of working and potential economic systems uniting traditional factors of production is introduced and investigated. The natural structure of a system resource is determined; its division into four kinds is grounded depending on features of economic systems comprising it. Requirements to system management as to management of a system resource of economy are formulated.

In the past 20 years the ideas of A. Greif have drawn much attention among the Western economists and economic historians. In Russia, this perspective is rarely discussed. This paper attempts to fill the gap and review the methodology, the basic concepts and findings of Greif, as well as their impact on development in the field of institutional economics and economic history. Advantages and drawbacks of Greif’s approach to the historical analysis of institutions are considered.

«Rosnano» top-manager’s article considers conditions for creating innovation economy in Russia. According to the author, it is necessary to work out a complex strategy, which should define the planning horizon, the model and resources for innovation development. The perfection of legislation in the sphere of organizational-legal forms, intellectual property, and technical regulation is needed in order to meet the goal of building post-industrial economy.

This paper is dedicated to the problems of innovation economy and considers the topic from three points of view: science, state regulation, and innovation business. The author discusses theoretical aspects of the economic role played by innovations and problems of putting them to work, as well as economic policy issues. A number of government policies and the discussion of economic efficiency of development institutions are included in the analysis. The article also considers the innovation business from its origins.

Rapid progress of science and technology after the WWII and their consecutive integration into economic and social processes went side by side with the growing understanding of the need for sophisticated state regulation of the resources allocated for augmentation of knowledge and evaluation of societal impacts of scientific experiments. Since then, statistics turned out to be one of the instruments that allowed developing standardized measurement of science and technology in terms of R&D inputs and outputs in relation with the innovation processes and economic growth. Through a system of economic indicators statistics provided essential data for decision making. Using the example of international conventions, formulated around STI measurement, the article shows how the role of statistics changes from simple registration of facts to active participation in public discussions on STI issues and integration in international strategic documents.

The article considers current problems of Russia’s science. Special attention is paid to external factors that negatively influence its effectiveness including considerable lag in public management sector. The issues of opposing higher education sector to the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) are also discussed. A number of indicators of the Russian science and its academic sector effectiveness are presented. The expediency of comparing scientific results with R&D expenditures is shown. The problems connected with using bibliometric methods are discussed. Special attention is paid to the necessity of preserving and further developing Russian science including RAS.