This paper investigates the monetary theory of Semyon Falkner (1890–1938), initially recognized in the early Bolshevik era as the Theory of the Emission Economy (Teoriya emissionnogo khozyaystva). Remarkably, Falkner’s theory can be viewed as an early precursor to the Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), which gained popularity in recent decades. The paper begins by presenting Falkner’s perspectives, delving into the controversies surrounding his theory, including reactions from Lenin, and examining the dynamics of inflation and monetary reform. A comparative analysis of the Theory of Emission Economy and MMT follows, revealing that Falkner articulated the fundamental tenets of MMT a century ago. The paper concludes by addressing the modifications to Falkner’s theory during the years of the planned socialist economy, illustrating the prevalence of the nominalist tradition in the Russian theory of money.

The article focuses on the creative contributions of Academician Yury V. Yaremenko, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who significantly influenced the development of heterodox economic theories. Yaremenko’s theory revolves around the view of the economy as a heterogeneous and pyramidal structure. At its foundation, lower levels employ massive and inexpensive resources with low returns, while upper levels use more productive yet costlier resources. Economic growth, in this context, is characterized by the interaction of two distinct processes, explaining the effects of scientific and technological development through “structural shifts”. The theory explains the relationships between substitution and compensation processes throughout historical development, leading to various forms of labor-saving and capital-saving scientific and technological progress. Its systemic nature is evident in connecting macro-level interactions with micro-level dynamics, specifically in how enterprises respond to resource scarcity by increasing the complexity of their production processes. The theory provides an explanation for the Soviet economy’s inability to transition to intensive growth, attributing it not only to external but also to internal constraints, such as the exaggerated development of the military-industrial complex. Additionally, it sheds light on why the Communist Party of the Soviet Union lost its role in safeguarding the common national interest among economic entities. Furthermore, Yaremenko’s theoretical constructs can be extended to the global economy, which can be presented as a heterogeneous hierarchical social structure. Technological leadership is a pivotal factor in the formation of three interconnected and complex “pyramidal” structures: material, technological, and financial.

The article deals with Heinrich Storch’s theory of internal goods found in his Course of Political Economy (1815), which expands beyond tangible goods to include intangible elements essential for societal well-being and social development. As the first Russian economist and a member of the Academy of Sciences, Storch challenged the views of Smith and Say, who limited productivity to the creation of material goods through labor. Storch gained widespread recognition in Europe, becoming a pioneering Russian economist to make a mark in the West. His influence extended to notable figures like F. List and C. Dunoyer. Storch’s theory was shaped by specific Russian circumstances, notably his strong opposition to serfdom. Storch’s theory illustrates the interplay between Western and Russian economic thought explored in this article. Within this framework, ideas emanate from the West, are adapted to Russian conditions, and subsequently wield influence over Western economists.

The article presents a comparative analysis of the concepts proposed by two influential figures in modern systems theory — Alexander Bogdanov and Ludwig von Bertalanffy. In light of the revival of systems analysis, the article addresses the need to reevaluate the systemic worldviews of these theorists, aiming to discern similarities, differences, and the potential for a systemic synthesis of their ideas. Summarizing the key principles of the new theory of economic systems and space-time analysis, the article highlights distinctions bet­ween Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s discrete (“elemental”) concept and Alexander Bogdanov’s continuous (“process”) concept. The shift in system formation from continuous to discrete forms across various fields is underscored, emphasizing the necessity for a holistic approach in 21st-century systems thinking. The article introduces a tetrad as a universal model, emphasizing its role in fostering integral, full-scale systems thinking. The concepts of Ludwig von Bertalanffy and Alexander Bogdanov can be seen as polar, reflecting a transformation in the theory and practice of system formation from the 1920s to the 1940s, moving from continuous systemic forms to discrete ones. Additionally, the article underscores distinctions between one-sided versions of systems concepts that focus on organizational structures, innovative projects, logistics processes, or intra- and external-system environments. The tetrad, serving as a comprehensive systemic worldview, incorporates object, process, design, and environmental subsystems. The article advocates for a holistic approach, uniting short- and long-term local and global subsystems, and outlines a foundational framework for integral, full-scale systems thinking in the 21st century.

Anatoly Efimov, a Soviet academician, exerted a significant influence on the theory, methodo­logy, and practice of long-term planning and forecasting for the national economy during his leadership at the Research Institute of Economics under the State Planning Commission of the USSR in Moscow. However, his foundational years as a scholar and organizer unfolded in Sverdlovsk. This article seeks to explore the early stages of his intellectual journey. Methodologically, the study employs the intellectual history approach, intertwining the history of ideas with an analysis of contextual factors that shaped the emergence, institutionalization, and development of specific viewpoints. The research relies on Efimov’s publications and archival materials from the library of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The article suggests that the backgrounds of scholars shape the creation and development of important theories or concepts. Efimov’s va­ried roles as an economist, including his work in the cooperative movement and industrial production, coupled with his positions as a teacher at the Ural Industrial Institute and the head of the Department of Economics, impacted the organization of his research, choice of topics, and the validity of his conclusions. Particularly noteworthy is Efimov’s practical orientation and steadfast connection with production.

The article focuses on the science fiction story “The Year of the Jackpot” by American writer Robert Heinlein, published in 1952. In this story, Heinlein outlines a social megacycle — an interesting and unusual phenomenon for that time. The essence of the megacycle lies in the internal connection between various nature cycles, leading to resonance when the minimum / maximum points of all individual cycles synchronize at a specific moment, causing a magnification of crisis events. Furthermore, as Heinlein emphasizes, by this moment, a mass of people has entered a somnambulistic state of consciousness, where their actions lose signs of rationa­lity and awareness. The article demonstrates that over the past 70 years since the story was released, the idea of the megacycle has become a norm in natural sciences. Causal relationships are now traced between astrophy­sical processes and tectonic megacycles, which in turn determine the geological, climatic, and biotic rhythms of the Earth. Meanwhile, concepts such as technological megacycles, capital accumulation cycles, passion cycles, and social revolution megacycles have been established in social sciences. The study provides an original explanation of the nature of the social megacycle from the perspective of chaos theory (complexity) and non-equilibrium economics. The role of the coherence principle in uniting individual cycles into a unified phenomenon is underscored. The article describes the impact of the population’s economic prosperity on the emergence of the social autism syndrome, which serves as a key factor in amplifying the megacycle.

The proposed comprehensive review of research literature explores the emerging field of human capi­tal as an ecosystem. The study aims to discern the various approaches to the development and implementation of human capital ecosystems, laying the groundwork for future theoretical advancements in this domain. Methodological principles from systems theory, human capital studies, and ecosystem concepts were employed throughout the investigation. The study sheds light on the core purpose of interactions within the human capi­tal ecosystem, which is to develop and employ labor potential and human capital while fostering a favorable socio-economic environment. Further examination revealed fundamental aspects of the human capital ecosystem concept, elucidating the interconnected processes of formation, accumulation, implementation, distribution, and utilization of human capital. These processes hinge on the cooperative efforts of participants, involving the co-evolution of capabilities and the creation of value. Identifying six factors that influence the reproduction of human capital in an ecosystem will enable future research to create practical assessment indicators. The features of the human capital ecosystem are identified, and a definition of the concept “reproduction of human capital as an ecosystem” is proposed. The conclusion is made that research on human capital as an ecosystem is in its infancy.

This study examines how the influence of collectivist values on economic prosperity is contingent upon the ethical systems that establish a foundation for cooperation within a society. Cultural studies suggest that individualistic cultures tend to develop a system of generalized morality, which promotes ethical and coope­rative behavior among abstract individuals in a society. In contrast, collectivist societies often adopt an ethi­cal system characterized by limited morality, confining moral conduct to family and relatives while excluding other groups. Limited morality has been frequently attributed to poor economic performance in collecti­vist cultures. Consequently, a prevailing implicit recommendation in this body of literature is to adopt a universal moral system across all countries. Modern theories in anthropology and cultural psychology suggest that the distinction in behavioral norms between “in-group” and “out-group” is a durable cultural characteristic of collectivist countries. Hence, striving for a moral system based on generalized morality may not yield signifi­cant economic improvements. Therefore, we propose a hypothesis that an effective direction for state policy deve­lopment lies in expanding the concept of kinship beyond the confines of the family to encompass larger groups such as communities or companies, thereby fostering cooperation within these expanded units. To test this hypothesis, an econometric model has been developed, enabling the estimation of the differentiated impact of ethi­cal system types on income in individualistic and collectivist countries. To assess the level of collecti­vism on a national scale, we develop a novel kinship intensity index utilizing G. Murdock’s Ethnographic Atlas.

During the ongoing shift from a digital to a knowledge-based economy, the role of science as a knowledge source becomes paramount. This article explores the methodological principles guiding the evolution of economic knowledge schools, with a specific focus on the case of the school of economics in Perm region (Russian Federation). The study identifies key stages in this evolution, considering new state priorities for the development of science in Russia and the unique socio-economic characteristics of the region. The study relies on solid sampling and content analysis of academic publications to unveil methodological principles and criteria. The school of economic thought in Perm stands out for its blend of deep theoretical analysis, empirical research, and practical recommendations tailored to the specifics of analyzed economic entities, territories, and regions. The article concludes by emphasizing the school’s ongoing contribution to the national economy and its potential for further advancement through collaborations with business, government, and other research institutions to address contemporary social challenges.