Abstract
The article examines the features of the economic development of Russia since 1887 by growth and risk parameters. The development risk was measured using the standard deviation of the annual growth rates of real GDP. Progressive, regressive, conservative, and aggressive development is proposed to determine according to the changes in growth and risk. The authors have analyzed the process of development under individual governments, as well as in general for the imperial, socialist, and post-Soviet periods, with the emphasis in the last two Stalinist and post-Stalinist, liberal and patriotic periods, respectively. Progressive changes in economic development are revealed: Stolypin reforms, industrialization and the “vertical of power”; regressive: civil war, Khrushchev reforms, perestroika, liberalization, and modernization; conservative: Kosygin reforms and “nationalization of the elite”. Except for opportunistic growth and risk surges 1911-1913 and 1998-2000, no aggressive developmental periods with identifiable institutional causes were found. The repetitive development cycle of the socialist and post-Soviet periods is shown. The conclusion is made about the greater authenticity of the Russian culture of the socialist development model and the least of the liberal ones, as well as the need to develop post-industrial development institutions that are authentic to the Russian culture for their application after the predicted institutional crisis.
Highlights
The conclusion is made about the greater authenticity of the Russian culture of the socialist development model and the least of the liberal ones, as well as the need to develop post-industrial development institutions that are authentic to the Russian culture for their application after the predicted institutional crisis
This research assumes that culture is in different ways consistent with different sociopolitical development models, which may be reflected in macroeconomic indicators
Akindinova N.V., Bessonov V.A., Iasin E.G., Baranov A.O., Skufiina T.P., and others have studied the analysis of the economic growth of the Russian economy in different historical periods and the factors influencing it [10,11,12]
Summary
This research assumes that culture is in different ways consistent with different sociopolitical development models, which may be reflected in macroeconomic indicators. The use of economic growth indicators for these purposes is not informative enough In this regard, by analogy with the technical analysis of the profitability of securities, the standard deviation of the growth rates of real GDP was used as an indicator of stability. By analogy with the technical analysis of the profitability of securities, the standard deviation of the growth rates of real GDP was used as an indicator of stability Akindinova N.V., Bessonov V.A., Iasin E.G., Baranov A.O., Skufiina T.P., and others have studied the analysis of the economic growth of the Russian economy in different historical periods and the factors influencing it [10,11,12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
