In his notes about the state of economic science in the USSR and Russia, the author notes her ups and downs, pays tribute to the research of prominent Russian economists, ahead of its time. The main reason for the decline of economic science and the lack of demand for its results, he calls the state of society and its institutions. The author’s conclusions – polemical and necessarily subjective – give up hope on the possibility of change in this area, since the modernization elements of society who are always activated in times of crisis by presenting a demand for science and education.

G.I. Khanin,
Doctor of Economics,
Novosibirsk State Technical University

We do not see

In his article “Why we do not have great economists” (Economic Strategy. 2001. № 5-6) Russian economist Vladimir Fyodorov has drawn attention to the fact that over 40 years of existence, the Nobel Prize in Economics laureates among its no Russian (Russia’s only winner of this award Kantorovich was a mathematician).

Not convinced that this figure – the best measure of the level of economic science, but there is other evidence. On the Russian authors almost never referred to in textbooks on the history of economic thought in foreign economic textbooks and scientific articles (except for specially devoted to Russia). In foreign books on economic history of Russia is dominated by references to foreign scholars, even if the authors know Russian. It does not help and translate into English. For example, in publishing, dealing with the translation of the Russian journals, I was told that translated business journal buy overseas in the number of … 39 copies.

Indicators, even quoting the Russian natural-scientific literature shamefully low, and the economic sciences and humanities are generally not given – probably even compare uncomfortable.

Calculations based on the volume and dynamics of economic development in Russia for three centuries before 1900, are exclusively owned by Western authors.

Helplessness and incompetence of many Russian economists often, particularly when discussing the prospects for economic development in Russia and the crisis because, with few exceptions, are based on official statistics, not trying to verify their authenticity. So, do not bother to count the dynamics of the most important factor in economic development – fixed assets, which, according to official estimates, not decreased over the post-Soviet period in the fall of the volume of capital investments in several times by the same official data. Which can not be understood as more or less educated economist. Equally striking underestimation (at least 5 times) the value of fixed assets.

Not surprisingly, the official science, and public authorities viewed nastupivshy after the recovery period in the 2008 economic crisis and revealed the true causes of the huge inflation in the same year. True, such as miscalculation made all international financial institutions.Apparently, economic science degrades not only in Russia.

Great concern to the weakness of Soviet economists have expressed sympathetic to the restructuring of foreign statesmen. Former German Chancellor and Finance Minister Helmut Schmidt said in 1991: “Your trouble is that you have little or no serious economists” .George Soros wrote in 1991: “… The total lack of basic economic knowledge – a disease which affects the whole country down to the upper echelons of power. Contrast c China is striking. Former Communist Party Secretary General Zhao Zi Yang was an excellent economist, and in his possession was a whole regiment of brilliant young minds. In the Soviet Union of not anything like.

Always there has been a miserable Russian economic science?

How did the weakness of economic science on the development of the Soviet economy?

Degradation factors

The role of degradation of economics in the collapse of perestroika

Economic Science of Russia in the post-Soviet period

Is it possible to restore the Russian economic science?