World artistic culture, types of art. World Artistic Culture - what is it? What is culture? Kinds of art
The theory of economic systems is one of the most important and most complex sections of economic theory. The problem is that there is no complete certainty as to what is meant by an economic system, in addition, there are endless debates over the method of studying this category. Nevertheless, it is possible to highlight the main points of this theory and, on their basis, analyze the existing economic system.
Scientists and economists begin in in this case from the fact that man is a biosocial being, i.e. he has certain bioparameters (height, weight, blood composition, etc.) and necessarily exists in communication with his own kind. The need to maintain these bioparameters and social environment leads to the emergence of numerous needs.
A need that requires satisfaction is the need of people with something objectively necessary to maintain the vital functions and development of the body and personality. L. Maslow will give the following classification of human needs: physiological (food, drink, clothing, etc.) and the need for safety; social (love, tenderness, friendship and self-respect (i.e. achieving a goal), self-realization (i.e. realizing abilities).
In order to satisfy his needs, a person must actively participate in social production, which consists of two groups of relations. On the one hand, this is the attitude of people to nature, on the other, to each other in the course of performing a production task. Analysis of these relationships will give us the opportunity to highlight the main elements of the economic system, as well as consider the connections that arise between them.
The relationship of people to nature during the production process is unthinkable without three elements. The first condition is labor, i.e. conscious human activity aimed at adapting natural substances to the needs of people. In addition, tools (more broadly - means of labor), i.e. what a person does to influence natural matter. Further, the subject of labor, i.e. what a person acts on is the natural substance itself.
The means of labor and the object of labor, taken together, represent the means of production of a given society. All three elements are productive forces or productive resources of a given society.
The study of people's relationships to each other in the course of social production allows us to determine the connections that arise between the mentioned elements. Two groups are known here: on the one hand, organizational-economic relations (such as a master worker), the main task of which is to ensure the uninterrupted production process; they are studied within the framework of microeconomics and, as a rule, are not of decisive importance for the theory of economic systems; on the other, social -economic or production relations, which reflect connections within economic systems.
In turn, they are divided into four groups: production - the process of creating material and spiritual goods necessary for human existence: distribution - the process of determining the share in which each economic entity took part in social production; exchange is the process of movement of material goods and services from one economic entity to another, a form of connection between production and consumption; consumption is the process of using the results of production to satisfy human needs.
The property relations that determine this system of socio-economic relations stand apart.
Depending on what elements and connections we focus on, we get one or another type of economic system. In general, three main concepts for typifying economic systems can be distinguished: formational; form of organization of public economy; theories of stage development of society.
Let's consider the possible options in more detail. In accordance with dialectical method we must decide next questions:
1. what contradiction determines development of this type economic system;
2. formulate the law of its development;
3. determine the stages of development;
4. determine the method of transition from one stage of the economic system to another.
It is advisable to begin the study of concepts with a formational approach, since it is historically and logically primary.
The formational approach arose in mid-19th V. The authors of this theory are K. Marx and F. Engels. The source of the development of the system in this case is the contradiction between the productive forces, which change revolutionaryly, and production relations, which are much more conservative... Based on this contradiction, K. Marx formulates the law of development of society - the law of correspondence of the nature of production relations to the level of development of productive forces. This means that at a certain stage of development of the system, production relations begin to interfere with the development of productive forces and must be changed. As a result, K. Marx identifies five possible levels of correspondence or five methods of production: primitive communal; slaveholding; feudal; capitalist or bourgeois; communist.
At the same time, K. Marx makes a number of reservations. First of all, we are talking only about the background human society, his real history will begin only with the communist formation. In addition, the formational approach was created on the basis of factual material from countries Western Europe and for Western European countries. In relation to, say, Asia, K. Marx uses a very conventional term - the Asian mode of production. The next remark is that the transition to communism can only occur simultaneously in large group most developed countries, i.e. the possibility of building communism or even socialism in one single country was denied.
Later this thesis was changed by V.I. Lenin.
The only way the transition from one mode of production to another, according to K. Marx, is a social revolution, which can take both peaceful (victory in elections for subsequent social transformations) and non-peaceful (armed uprising, Civil War) forms The choice of path, in this case, is predetermined by the maturity of both external and internal factors, while with the development of society there is a tendency for the importance of internal factors to increase. However, within the very method of production, K. Marx did not deny the possibility of evolutionary development. For example, capitalism goes through at least two stages of development: the first is free competition capitalism, which is characterized by private capitalist property, free competition and open forms of exploitation; the second is monopoly capitalism, which is largely based on joint-stock and state ownership, imperfect competition and veiled forms of exploitation.
The next option for typifying economic systems is the form of organization of the social economy. The very idea of this concept belongs to K. Marx. Besides, this kind the approach can also be found in the works of V.I. Lenin.
Here, the source of development of the system is the contradiction between production and consumption, considered from the point of view of possible forms of their connection. Based on this contradiction, the law of system development or the law of proportionality of development is formed. The idea of this law can be found in A. Smith and D. Ricardo. In the very general view it is about balancing production and consumption. This balance can be established consciously. Here the connection between production and consumption is direct. According to Marxists, in this case we are faced with two forms of social economy: natural and planned. On the other hand, the balance between production and consumption can be established spontaneously, i.e. through the market mechanism.
IN AND. Lenin identified two conditions for the emergence of a commodity economy: the general division of labor and the isolation of the commodity producer, determined by frequent ownership of the means of production. However, for the classics of Marxism, the formational approach is incomparably more important, therefore the theory of forms of organization of the social economy was not deeply developed by them. Later, Eucken and Cloten created their original version of the development of economic systems of this type. In their opinion, the form of organization of public economics exists in four possible options.
First, a traditional economy emerges - a bizarre combination of subsistence farming and simple commodity production. Non-core characteristics boil down to the following: religious and cultural values are primary compared to economic activities; the economic role of an individual is dictated by his origin and belonging to a particular caste; since there is no competition, technical progress limited: economic power is concentrated in the hands of a small group of people.
Traditional society is being replaced by a free market economy (Laissez faire) (an economy of free competition), which is characterized by the decisive role of frequent ownership of economic resources; motivation of behavior - profit maximization based on an individual decision; competition is free, the market is governed spontaneously; economic power is dispersed among a mass of small producers.
Somewhat later, a market economy with restrictions arises (the economy of imperfect competition), it exists in two versions: the first version is mixed systems, which are characterized by: the dominance of private monopoly, joint-stock, state forms of ownership: competition is limited on the one hand by the state, on the other by monopolies; economic power is in the hands of the “big triad”: the state, trade unions and large corporations: the motivation of behavior now involves not only maximizing profits, but also solving the most important social problems.
The second version of a market economy with restrictions - market socialism - has the following features: the dominance of public ownership of resources in the presence of free markets for goods and services; motivation for the decision being made; maintaining a balance between social goals and market indicators; competition is limited by the state; economic power is concentrated in the hands of the state.
Finally, the last, fourth form of organization of the social economy is a command (planned, definitive) economy. Like the previous form, it also comes in two forms.
The first model is pure communism, which has a number of specific features: the dominance of public property in the complete absence of markets; the motivation for the decision is the needs of society: competition is completely excluded; economic power is concentrated in the hands of society, but not the state.
This system is abstract model, but until now did not exist. The second model, which is called authoritarian capitalism, is much more widespread. It is characterized by: the system is based on private capitalist and state ownership: motivation economic activity- combination of interests of large monopolies and high-ranking government officials; competition is very weakly expressed and is mainly intersectoral in nature, lobbying is common, economic power is concentrated in the hands of the state (formally), real power lies with large monopolistic associations.
Since all four forms of organization public economy are very polar, modern authors believe that divergence occurs between them and the transition from one model to another is carried out through free elections to legislative bodies.
The youngest, but very popular concept is the theory of staged development of society. The source of development in this case is the same contradiction between production and consumption, only this time it is assessed from the point of view of the level of development of productive forces and improving the quality of life. Consequently, the law of development of a given economic system is the law of saving living and materialized labor. For the first time, such views can be found in A. De Saint-Simon and P. Fourier, but these authors never created a truly scientific concept of the stages of development of society. This was done later, in the 50s and 60s of the 20th century by W. Rostow and J. K. Galbraith. Each of them highlighted their own stages of development of society, although there is quite a lot in common between the views of these authors. W. Rostow’s concept includes five stages: first of all, this is a traditional society based on primitive manual technique, minimum per capita income and a high share of agriculture in social production. Next, the preparation of prerequisites for the ascent begins. At this stage, a new type of people appears - entrepreneurs, the banking system emerges, investments grow, trade develops.
The stage of preparation for the rise is replaced by the rise itself, which is associated with a significant increase in investment, the emergence of new industries, the spread of new technologies, and the growth of the middle class.
Movement towards maturity, i.e. the fourth stage develops more broadly the same features that characterize the recovery stage (i.e., further growth of investment, etc.). Final on given time stage - the era of high mass consumption determines the turn towards the production of durable consumer goods, great attention to consumer demand and, finally, a significant increase in real incomes of the population.
J. K. Galbraith's version is more compact: he proposes the identification of only three stages social development: The earliest stage is pre-industrial society, which is based on undeveloped productive forces and an extremely low standard of living. The next stage is an industrial society, within which machine production and mass production of goods develop, on the one hand, and on the other, real incomes of all segments of the population grow. The third stage is a new industrial or post-industrial society, which is characterized by a turn from manufacturing industries to a service economy, the predominance of knowledge workers in the economically active population, the growing importance of theoretical knowledge, and finally, the emergence of a new social stratum - a technostructure.
The form of transition from one stage to another is twofold, i.e. for technology this is a scientific and technological revolution, and for social relations it is characteristic evolutionary development or convergence various systems).
In conclusion, readers should be warned AWAY from a very common mistake. Typically, the three indicated types of economic systems are understood as alternative or even moreover, antagonistic. This is not true. Each of these systems was created in a certain historical period and solved, first of all, the problems of that period. In general, they describe from different sides the very complex economic reality that surrounds us.
Thus, the economic system of a society is a set of interconnected social elements that form a certain integral institutional mechanism through which limited economic resources are distributed.
Different economic systems differ from each other in their ideology, in their approach to solving economic problems. The fundamental differences are as follows:
a) in the form of ownership of resources;
b) in the manner in which economic activity is coordinated and managed.
Typically, market, command, traditional and mixed economic systems are distinguished.
A market economy (pure capitalism) is characterized by private ownership of resources, freedom of choice and competition. It is based on private interest. The economic role of the state is limited. The role of government is to protect private property and establish rules of law that promote competition and facilitate the functioning of free markets.
A command economy (administrative command) is characterized by state public ownership of the means of production, collective economic decision-making, and centralized management of the economy through state planning.
Traditional economics characteristic of underdeveloped countries and archaic societies based on communal property and subsistence farming. Decisions are made according to traditions and customs. Religious and cultural values are primary here compared to economic activities. Heredity and caste dictate the economic roles of individuals.
A mixed economy is a system that includes elements of the above systems, primarily market and command. It is typical for most modern countries. Here private and state property, the market and the “coordination” of economic activity by the market, production in private firms and the active participation of the state in ensuring economic stability and the redistribution of income through the state budget coexist.
A characteristic feature of a mixed economic system is the social orientation of the economy.
On a general market basis and social orientation mixed economic system in different countries It has specific features. In particular, the scale and form of combination of the public and private sectors are different, and the degree of social orientation of government intervention in private entrepreneurship is not the same.
In the world practice of developed countries, two main models of a mixed economic system are distinguished:
The liberal model (free enterprise model) is based on little government intervention;
The socially oriented model is characterized by a high degree of state regulation of the economy.
In Marxist economic theory, the main elements of the economic system are the productive forces and economic relations. Productive forces are material, energy, personal and other factors that ensure production. The productive forces change, therefore, in each new period of production, the economic system is characterized by a new level and nature of development of the productive forces. Economic relations represent stable connections and interaction of people in the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods and services. The main production relation is property. Productive forces are the material and material side of production, and production relations are the social side of production, determining the economic roles of certain subjects in the economy and the forms of development of productive forces. Productive forces and production relations together form the economic basis of society, on which political, ideological and other relations and institutions depend. Economic basis and over-
Public production Public side
Relations of production
Material side
The productive forces of a construction society form a social-economic formation (SEF) (Fig. 2.3 - 2.4). In the evolution of OEF, five types of formations are distinguished - primitive communal, slaveholding, feudal, capitalist, communist. The change of formations is explained as follows. Productive forces are an active element of the economic mode of production. They are constantly developing, but their development requires appropriate economic relations,
Economic basis
changing organizational management structure and economic mechanism. The shaded area indicates the interpenetration of elements of the economic system. For example, property has legal (superstructure) and economic (base) sides. The division of labor is an element of the productive forces, partly an element of production relations. Economic relations are a passive, conservative element of the economic system, therefore the development of productive forces is ahead of existing forms production relations and the latter at a certain stage begin to slow it down. Contradictions between productive forces and production relations lead to social revolution. As a result, the system of industrial relations and the superstructure changes. New forms of ownership, forms of management, political, legal institutions and management mechanisms inherent in the new formation create favorable opportunities for the development of productive forces. This ensures the forward movement of the economy and society as a whole6.
In the 20th century The formational approach to the evolution of economic systems has been repeatedly criticized. Thus, the German economist W. Eucken rejected the typology of socio-economic formations, according to K. Marx, as incorrect and proposed reducing all types of economic systems to three: a) the system of barter economy, or market economy; b) a system of regulated market economy; c) a centrally managed economic system.
American sociologist and politician W. Rostow in the 60s. XX century created the theory of stages of economic growth, according to which the economic system of any country in the past or present can be attributed to one of five successive stages of economic growth. Their change is based on the progress of technology and production. These stages are: traditional and transitional society, maturing society (decisive shift stage), industrial society and the stage of mass consumption. The main forms of society, according to W. Rostow, are traditional and industrial, the remaining stages are transitional. Each stage is determined by the interaction of technical, economic, ideological and psychological factors. The change of stages occurs in connection with changes in the leading group of industries and the level of accumulation (that part of income that goes to development and expansion of production). At the first stage it dominates Agriculture and low level of labor productivity, the rate of accumulation is very low or absent. The second and third stages do not have a clear distinction.
Traditional society is different low level labor productivity and a low savings rate. Agriculture predominates in the production structure. In a transitional society, this predominance remains, but the initial conditions for industrialization are created and its infrastructure is developed. It is undergoing an industrial revolution, the rate of accumulation is increasing, and consumption is limited.
For industrial society characterized by widespread machine production, the most high norm savings and economic growth rates. The rate of accumulation reaches 25 - 30% of national income, and the average annual growth rate is 10% or more. Industry becomes predominant in the structure of production, and heavy industry begins to play a leading role. Production growth begins to outpace population growth, and conditions are created for consumption growth. The stage of mass consumption is characterized by technical revolutions, relatively surplus capital, and an increase in the well-being of the population.
The rate of economic growth and the rate of accumulation are decreasing, and the share of consumption is increasing. The leading group is the industry producing durable consumer goods. Each country, according to W. Rostow, can be classified into one of five stages of growth. These stages characterize the evolution of any economic system, but this theory took into account only historical development until the 60s. XX century Changes in production, scientific and technological progress, consumption, characteristic of the 60s - 70s. prompted W. Rostow to put forward a hypothesis about the formation of another, sixth stage of economic growth, which he called the stage of searching for quality of life.
In the early 70s. American sociologist D. Bell in his work “The Coming of Post-Industrial Society” emphasized that the concepts of “feudalism”, “capitalism” and “socialism” in the interpretation of K. Marx are built on the basis of property relations, but property is only a legal fiction. D. Bell considered this approach incorrect and contrasted his own approach with the formational ones.
Socio-economic changes, according to Bell, occur along with changes in the production and use of scientific and technical knowledge. He identified three parts in society: social structure, government structure and culture. Social structure includes the sectoral structure of the economy, the level of technology, the nature of the division of labor and its impact on the professional structure. Society moves from pre-industrial to industrial, and then to post-industrial society (Fig. 2.5). Pre-industrial society characterized by undeveloped productive forces and the need to directly turn to nature as a source of existence. Industrial is organized on the basis of machine-industrial production. Here D. Bell has no fundamental differences with W. Rostow. As for post-industrial society, it is characterized, according to Bell, the following signs: 1) the bulk of employment moves from the production of goods to the production of services; 2) vital role play in the ecosystem scientific knowledge and innovations; 3) the main place in the professional structure belongs to specialists. 1.
According to KMarx: the primitive communal mode of production
slave-owning method of production i
feudalism I
capitalism i
communism 2.
According to W. Rostow: traditional society
transitional society i
stage of a decisive shift (maturing society) i
industrial society 1
mass consumer society i
society for the search for “quality of life” 3.
According to D. Bell: pre-industrial society
industrial society i
post-industrial society
Rice. 2.5. Evolution of economic systems
The authors of the concept of a new industrial society, the American economist D.K. Galbraith and the French sociologist R. Aron, distinguish two small subsystems in the modern economic system of society - market and industrial. The first prevailed in the 19th century. and was a collection of small private enterprises. In the 20th century she began to occupy a secondary position. The main place belongs to the industrial system - a collection of large corporations. Its main features are organization, planning, control over production and consumption. In small-scale production with a simple production structure and management, economic power belongs to the owners of capital, and under the dominance of large corporations, the economic power of capital owners (shareholders) is often just a formality. To a large extent, this power passes into the hands of the technostructure - corporate managers, lawyers, scientists, engineers, economists, etc.
Theories of industrial society are associated with a technological approach to the evolution of society. They provided explanations for the changes observed in the second half of the 20th century.
Row Western authors developed the theory of a mixed economy, noting that as a result of increased economic activity by the state, capitalism is transformed from a system of free private enterprise to an economic system in which the private and public sectors complement each other. American economist E. Hansen described the economic system post-war period as a system in which a transition has been made from an individualistic to a mixed private-public economy with an emphasis on social welfare. P. Samuelson also characterizes the economies of developed countries as a mixed system of free enterprise, in which economic control is exercised by both society and private institutions.
Rethinking the concepts of “capitalism”, “socialism”, etc. in the late 80s - early 90s. happened both in our economic environment and public consciousness. In 1990, the Russian economist Yu. Kochevrin published an article “Capitalism from the perspective of history and modernity”, in which he admits that “for some time now I have experienced intellectual anxiety, comparing the two most common definitions of capitalism. Capitalism in the Marxist understanding is an economic system based on the exploitation of wage labor. In Western understanding, this is a system of free enterprise"7. The author of the article came to the conclusion that capitalism is only a part of the market system, manifested in private interest and private appropriation of economic results. The market system goes beyond this private interest and reflects the process of development of civilization.
In the early 90s. within the magazine " World economy And international relationships" there was a discussion about the attitude towards formational theory. It was suggested that the formational approach to the evolution of society contains features and characteristics that make it unsuitable as a universal method of explanation historical process, that Marx’s scheme of social development turned out to be limited, and in a number of aspects, simply erroneous8.
The culture of a people (a set of traditions, norms of behavior, views, ideas, aesthetic, ethical, political worldviews, etc.) is not an addition to the basis, not a product of the basis, but an independent result of the activities of society, which has a strong impact on the basis, as in history Often it was changes in consciousness that preceded changes in production relations and served as the basis for these changes. Therefore, it seems incorrect to absolutize any one aspect of the life of society - material or spiritual. Only the totality of all forms of life activity of society in their unity and inseparability is civilization. Therefore, it can be considered justified to replace the formational approach with a civilizational one, i.e. approach from the standpoint of universal human interests and values, which is based on the criteria of modernity Western civilization, for it is precisely this that is the expression of today’s highest economic, scientific, technical and democratic level of development, without the achievement of which no society can be considered modern1.
We can conclude that the main approaches to characterizing economic systems are: 1) formational; 2) technological; 3) civilizational. With the first approach, the main attention in the ecosystem is paid to forms of ownership of the means of production and appropriation of production results, with the second - with the technical equipment of production and with the third - with the universal human values of freedom, democracy, etc., which determine the development of the system.
Comparative study of economic systems (economic comparative studies) is a course that, in accordance with modern world practice of economic education, is a necessary element of the study of economic theory. Comparative science shows the existence (both simultaneously and sequentially in time) various types economic systems and analyzes the similarities and differences between them. The textbook is intended for undergraduates, graduate students and teachers of economic faculties of universities and economic universities. It may be useful to specialists in the field of international economic relations and government officials.
PARAMETERS FOR COMPARISON OF ECONOMIC SYSTEMS.
Before we begin the search for solutions to the problems of content, structure and types of economic systems, we will fix a number of methodological prerequisites highlighted in the introduction. First, we will proceed from the fact that the economy is a set of interacting systems. Secondly, the latter will be revealed as systems of elements (groups of elements - subsystems), which, in turn, can be combined into metasystems. Third, economic systems are limited in time and space.
Below we would like to offer our own version of the typology of economic systems. It will be built on the basis of a certain classification of the elements that make up these systems. Every economic system contains approximately the same set of elements. The functions of these elements in any economic system are of the same type, but their specific content (the way the function is performed) varies from system to system. As a result, as will be shown below, it is possible to construct (as a scientific abstraction) a certain “system of elements” that make up economic systems. Depending on the change in the specific content of these elements, the type of economic system will change.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface 5
Introduction to Methodology comparative analysis economic systems 8
1. System method research and its use in economic theory 8
2. The concept of an economic system 16
3. Economic systems: models and realities 23
4. Specifics of the methodology for comparative analysis of economic systems 28
4.1. Some preliminary remarks 28
4.2. “Scenario” and main steps of comparative research 35
4.3. Methodology for a holistic socio-spatial and socio-temporal comparative study of economic systems 40
Section 1 PARAMETERS FOR COMPARISON OF ECONOMIC SYSTEMS
Chapter 1 Structure and parameters for comparison of economic systems 49
1.1. Structure and main elements of economic systems 49
1.2. On the problem of formalizing a model of a system of comparison parameters 62
Key terms and concepts 70
Chapter 2 Parameters for comparison of economic systems (using the example transition economies) 73
2.1. Technical, economic and post-economic comparison parameters 74
2.2. Parameters for comparing relations that determine the allocation of resources (the problem of the relationship between plan and market) 79
2.3. Property Relationship Comparison Parameters 89
2.4. Comparative analysis of social parameters of transition systems 97
2.5. Comparative study of the relations of reproduction and the mechanism of functioning of economic systems 108
Key terms and concepts 117
Section 2 HISTORICAL COMPARISON OF ECONOMIC SYSTEMS
Chapter 1 Historical approach to comparison of economic systems: methodological notes 120
1.1. Civilizational and formational approaches. Periodization of development of economic systems 121
1.2. Nonlinearity of social economic development, types of socio-economic systems 133
1.3. The structure of the economic system: a historical view 140
Key terms and concepts 148
Chapter 2 Pre-bourgeois economic systems and the genesis of bourgeois economic systems 151
2.1. Typology and comparative study of pre-bourgeois economic systems 151
2.2. The genesis of a market capitalist economy as a global process. Comparative analysis of the prerequisites, progress, results of the formation of market economies 164
Key terms and concepts 173
Chapter 3 Economics of real socialism: genesis, development models and nature of the crisis 176
3.1. Genesis and main stages of development of economic systems of “real socialism” 176
3.2. The socio-economic nature of “real socialism” 184
3.3. Contents and contradictions of the economy of “real socialism” 189
Key terms and concepts 196
Chapter 4 Socialist and capitalist world systems: a comparative study 198
4.1. Typology and comparative analysis of the economies of “real socialism” 198
4.2. A comparative study of the dynamics and results of the world socialist and world capitalist systems in the 20th century in 205
Key terms and concepts 220
Section 3 FEATURES OF DEVELOPED MARKET (CAPITALIST) SYSTEMS AND THEIR PLACE IN THE WORLD ECONOMY
Introduction 221
Chapter 1 Material conditions of production and economic system in developed capitalist systems 224
1.1. Identification of economies with different levels of economic development as the first step towards identifying different economic systems 224
1.2. Historical characteristics of developed countries as industrialized and capitalist 228
1.3. The capitalist mode of production and European civilization - what are the origins of their preferential positions in the world economy? 232
1.4. Comparative role industrial, pre-industrial and post-industrial sectors 235
1.4.1. Changes in the structure of production 235
1.4.2. Assessing changes in the nature of resources, products and needs 238
1.4.3. Changes in the nature of work 242
1.4.4. Changes in needs and motivation due to changes in the nature of work 248
Key terms and concepts 249
Chapter 2 Changes in economic relations and institutions in the context of post-industrial trends 252
2.1. New quality of the market in the context of the genesis of post-industrial society 252
2.1.1. Directions of changes in the nature of relations between market agents 252
2.1.2. Modern market infrastructure 255
2.1.3. The role of state and public regulation of the market 261
2.2. Transformation of production factors. “Human capital” 263
2.2.1. The relative role of various factors of production 263
2.2.2. What is “human capital”? 266
2.3. Changes in property relations 270
2.4. New types of labor relations and labor motivation mechanisms 277
2.4.1. Development of non-monetary forms of labor motivation 277
2.4.2. Flexible organization of working hours 279
2.4.3. Use of migrant labor 281
2.5. Methods and types social regulation market 282
Key terms and concepts 285
Section 4 TYPOLOGIZATION AND COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DEVELOPED MARKET (CAPITALIST) SYSTEMS
Introduction 287
Chapter 1 Basic models of developed market systems 291
1.1. Liberal model. “Asian” (Japanese) version of the liberal model 291
1.2. Model of social market economy (social liberal) 293
1.3. Social democratic model 295
1.4. Real developed capitalist economies and models 296
Key terms and concepts 299
Chapter 2 Comparative analysis of the main models of a developed capitalist economy 301
2.1. Grouping of developed market systems in terms of GDP dynamics and other macroeconomic indicators 301
2.2. A comparative study of coordination methods in developed market systems 304
2.2.1. Concentration of production and capital and its impact on the market 304
2.2.2. State regulation of the market 313
2.2.3. The influence of TNCs on the system of market relations 325
2.3. Comparative study of property relations 327
2.3.1. State property 327
2.3.2. Specifics of institutions of private and private-corporate property 338
2.3.3. Employees' property. Cooperatives 346
2.4. Comparative analysis of the formation and distribution of income. Market work force 360
2.5. Comparative study of reproduction processes and its results 381
Key terms and concepts 392
Section 5 DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: PLACE IN THE WORLD ECONOMY, TYPOLOGIZATION, COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MAIN MODELS
Chapter 1 Developing economies as a special type of economic systems 395
1.1. Common features economic systems of developing countries 395
1.1.1. Material conditions of production 396
1.1.2. Peculiarities economic structure developing countries 399
1.2. Basic models of economic systems of developing countries 401
1.2.1. Underdeveloped countries 402
1.2.2. Intermediate developing countries 407
1.2.3. Newly industrialized countries 409
1.3. The position of developing countries in the world economy. Prospects for catch-up development 413
Key terms and concepts 420
Chapter 2 Comparative analysis of economic relations and institutions 422
2.1. The relationship between pre-market and market methods of resource allocation, features economic functions states 422
2.2. The structure of forms of ownership and the preservation of relations of non-economic coercion 432
2.3. Ways to mobilize resources for economic growth. Strategy for catch-up modernization 441
2.3.1. Strategy for catch-up modernization 441
2.3.2. Population growth and resources needed for development 452
2.3.3. The place of developing countries in the world economy 454
2.4. Level, differentiation and methods of income distribution: Specifics of economic determinants social stratification 466
Key terms and concepts 478
Section 6 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TRANSFORMATIONAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC SYSTEMS
Introduction Specifics of the study and some common features of transformation economies 481
Chapter 1 Comparative analysis of the main parameters of transformations 484
1.1. Grouping of transformational economic systems from the point of view of GDP dynamics 484
1.2. Comparative study of methods of coordination in transformational socio-economic systems 492
1.2.1. Comparative study of liberalization processes 492
1.2.2. The relationship between competition and monopolization 499
1.2.3. A comparative study of the transformation of market institutions and government regulation 505
1.2.4. Main types of coordination methods in transformation economic systems (preliminary grouping) 509
1.3. Comparative study of property transformations 512
1.3.1. Preliminary stage: changes in property relations during the “decline” of the world socialist system 513
1.3.2. Privatization and denationalization: specifics of various systems 516
1.3.3. Privatization and denationalization: scale, dynamics, methods, efficiency 527
1.4. Comparative analysis of social results: ways of generating and distributing income 539
1.5. Comparative study of reproduction processes and macroeconomic stabilization 570
1.5.1. Comparative analysis of structural changes 570
1.5.2. Investments and innovations 575
1.5.3. Comparative analysis of inflation and financial stabilization processes; inflation and unemployment 591
1.5.4. Main types of reproduction trends (preliminary typology) 606
Key terms and concepts 608
Chapter 2 Transformational economic systems: dynamics, types, generalized characteristics (some conclusions) 610
2.1. Vectors and stages of transformations. The Future of Transformational Economies 610
2.2. Basic transition models and types of transformation economies 614
2.3. General features of the type of transformational socio-economic systems 620
Key terms and concepts 624
Section 7 PROBLEMS OF INTERTYPE COMPARISON AND INTERACTION OF ECONOMIC SYSTEMS IN THE WORLD ECONOMY
Chapter 1 Intertype comparison of economic systems 626
1.1. Methodological prerequisites for intertype comparison 627
1.2. Comparison of economic systems by level of development of material conditions of production 631
1.3. Comparison of economic systems by method of resource allocation 634
1.4. Comparison of economic systems by type of property relations 638
1.5. Differences in goals and mechanisms of reproduction in different types of economic systems 643
1.6. Sources and forms of income in various types of economic systems 647
1.7. Place various types economic systems in the modern world economy 651
1.7.1. Special role developed capitalist economies in the process of globalization 651
1.7.2. World economy: core and periphery 657
1.7.3. Globalization as recolonization. New Empire 659
1.8. Different types economic systems as a frozen cross-section of their historical evolution 661
Key terms and concepts 663
Chapter 2 Globalization as a new context for comparative analysis of economic systems 665
2.1. Globalization: main approaches to definition 666
2.2. Contents of the globalization process 678
2.2.1. Global Macrotechnology 679
2.2.2. Globalization of economic relations and institutions 681
2.2.3. Globalization: supranational and national economic systems 690
2.3. Problems of diffusion of macro- and micro-level economic systems 695
Key terms and concepts 702
Conclusion 705
Statistical Applications 709.
