Economic system in a transition economy. Varieties of transition economies. See what “Transition Economy” is in other dictionaries

Features of the transition economy in Russia

In accordance with the criteria of European Union experts, since mid-1994 Russia has been classified as a country with a transition type of economy. These criteria mainly come down to the relationship between centralized and market methods of economic management. When it became clear that elements of the market and market infrastructure in Russia had emerged and became indestructible, the European Union recognized the transitional nature of the Russian economy.

A transition economy is a special state of an economic system when it operates during the period of transition of society from one established historical system to another. The transition period is a period of time during which society carries out fundamental economic, political and social transformations, and the country's economy moves into a new, qualitatively different state in connection with fundamental reforms of the economic system.

The first factor: such an economy is an intersystem formation. Therefore, the essence of a transition economy is a mixture, a combination of administrative-command and modern market systems with their contradictions and differently functioning elements.

Second factor: if command and market economies are characterized by a certain integrity and sustainability of development, then a transition economy is characterized by instability of the state, a violation of integrity. This situation, which is a crisis for the existing economic system, can be considered normal for a transforming economy. The preservation and reproduction of instability and disequilibrium of the system for a relatively long time has its own reason: a change in the goal. If in an ordinary, stable system such a goal is its self-preservation, then for a transition economy it is transformation into another system.

Third factor: a transition economy is characterized by quantitative and qualitative changes in the composition of elements. It “inherited” the structural elements of the previous system: state enterprises, collective farms, production cooperatives, households and the state. But these elements function in a qualitatively different, transforming economic system, and therefore change both their content and their “functions associated with the emergence of a market economy. At the same time, in a transition economy, new elements that are not characteristic of the old system appear: entrepreneurial structures of various forms property, non-state enterprises, exchanges, commercial banks, non-state pension, insurance and other funds, farms.

Fourth factor: in a transition economy there is a qualitative change in systemic connections and relationships. The old planning and directive ties between economic entities disintegrated and disappeared, clearing space for the formation of new market ties. However, the latter are still of a “transitional” unstable nature and appear in such a deformed form as “barter” payments between enterprises; mutual non-payments between business entities are characterized by frequent failures and crisis manifestations.

It should be noted that the concept of “transition economy” is not new in the history of the development of our country. It existed in the 20s of our century and consisted of 5 socio-economic structures: socialist, private capitalist, state capitalist, small-scale commodity and patriarchal. However, its goals and direction of transformation processes were directly opposite to the modern transition economy. Then the main task was the transition from a multi-structure economy to a unified - socialist one. Now the task is exactly the opposite - to replace the uniform economy of state socialism with a multi-structured national economy, which serves as the basis of a modern market economy.

The goal of transformations in a transition economy is a market model of a market economy.

The main difficulty of the transition period is the creation of market economy institutions. Institutions in a broad sense are the rules of economic behavior and the mechanisms that ensure their implementation, as well as economic organizations, business entities. IN transition period institutions are formed without which a market economy cannot function normally: private property, economic freedom and responsibility of business entities, competition, market infrastructure, etc.

A characteristic feature of a transition economy is institutional incompleteness, the absence or embryonic state of individual market institutions. In most CIS countries, this is, first of all, the lack of a land market, poor development stock market and the entire market infrastructure as a whole.

Distinctive feature transition economy are the scale and depth of ongoing transformations. They seize the foundations of the existing system; property relations, political and legal system society, social consciousness. Thus, the transition to market economy requires profound changes in the institutional structure of society, institutional transformation: the transformation of property relations (privatization) and the introduction of the institution of private property, liberalization of the economy, the creation of a package of market laws and limiting the role of the state, the formation of new business entities - commercial banks, various exchanges, investment and pension funds and other systems.

The main feature of the economy in the transition period - the inertia of reproduction is associated with the continuity of the reproduction process, excluding development on the principle of the initial “destruction to the ground” of everything old, and then the creation of everything new on this basis. This continuity also predetermines the impossibility of quick replacement. existing forms others, desirable. Such actions inevitably bring chaos to the production process, deform it, and lead to a decline in production. The inertia of reproduction in this sense presupposes the preservation in the transition economy - and for a sufficiently long period - of the old economic forms.

This, first of all, is manifested in the preservation of the production structure for some time, the transformation of which requires a relatively long period of time. The existing socio-economic structure of society cannot change quickly.

The inertia of the reproduction process gives rise to a number of consequences that are important to keep in mind in economic policy. Firstly, it determines the deep continuity of the transition economy with the initial state of transition. Secondly, it determines relatively long terms transition economy. Thirdly, inertia enhances the preservation of the social mentality that developed in the past.

Ignoring the inertia of the reproductive process is an underestimation of the objective nature of social evolution, admiration for the supposedly special role of the conscious principle in the development of society.

Another feature is the intensive preferential development of new forms and relationships. This feature emphasizes the mechanism of transition from one stage to another. This is a manifestation of the irreversibility of the evolutionary process, as well as its main tendencies.

Challenges of the transition economy in Russia

The first task of a transition economy is to combat the features of a centrally controlled economy.

The main features of a centrally controlled economy are as follows:

1. Supermonopoly - combination large sizes enterprises and a certain stereotype of economic behavior - the desire to maintain high prices, a unified policy (collusion) to extract subsidies, loans (preferential), tax benefits.

2. Militarized production structure, the main component of which is the military-industrial complex - the main consumer of resources, qualified work force(labor aristocracy).

3. A cost-based pricing system that does not allow for a realistic assessment of economic efficiency.

4. Lack of a mechanism for the economic protection of natural resources, production orientation towards the maximum use of resources, and not towards their rational use, incl. and during export.

5. Low standard of living: in the Russian Federation – 2% rich, 87% poor; in the USA – 2% rich, 80% – middle class.

6. Collectivist psychology that prevents transformation.

The economic basis of a planned economy is state ownership, the method of its movement is planned, banking system limited to a single state bank, pricing is carried out by a single economic center.

The transition period from a centrally controlled to a market economy will last decades, as it did in Germany and Japan after the war. Today the task is to ensure the effective functioning of the transition economy.

In determining the causes of the collapse of totalitarian regimes, two opposing positions have emerged. The first proceeds from the fact that before Gorbachev’s arrival, the difficulties of the socialist system did not indicate its unviability. Politically and economically it has been stable since the 30s, i.e. 55 years. The inept policy of perestroika led to its destruction.

From the standpoint of the second point of view, the command economy is unviable; it existed due to the high rate of introduction of new factors of production based on a repressive regime and low standard of living; its shortcomings are systemic.

External reasons for the decline of a centrally controlled economy include: the US rearmament program, expenses and defeat in the Afghan war, falling oil prices, rising living standards in developed countries Oh. In general, it is believed that the socialist system could have survived until 2000 with a 2% increase in national income.

Of course, creating a market is not an end in itself, but a means of creating an effective economic system. It is characterized by the following features:

economic basis - private property in various forms;

form of movement – regulated market;

banking system - commercial banks led by the Central Bank;

Pricing is free with a number of fixed prices.

The main tasks during the period of transition economy:

1. Overcoming crisis phenomena that deepened after society entered a transition economy.

Formation of market relations and market infrastructure.

Reforming property relations as the basis of the economic system.

4. Creation of conditions for economic freedom for all business entities.

5. Creation of a developed system of social protection and social guarantees that protect the population from the severe consequences of economic reform.

Practice shows that every post-socialist country that has taken the path of transition to a market economy has its own concepts and programs for solving the main problems of the transition economy and the formation of market relations. At the same time, several general, “mandatory” areas can be identified in them:

1. liberalization of the economy, associated primarily with the release of prices. This is the first step in economic reform. It allows us to identify the real relationship between supply and demand, identify unprofitable types of production and thereby outline priority directions for structural restructuring of the national economy. Subsequent (and often simultaneous) steps - liberation from state dictate financial relations, as well as domestic and foreign trade;

2. reforming property relations through denationalization and privatization of state property. It is as a result of privatization that a variety of forms of ownership should be established: state, collective and private. They are necessary to overcome the state monopoly, form a diverse market economy, reduce the scope of state regulation of social production, create and develop competitive market relations;

3. stabilization of the economy, which means the elimination sharp fluctuations free prices and the formation of stable financial relations;

4. restructuring (structural adjustment) of the economy and individual enterprises, including measures to rehabilitate production, bringing the structure of the national economy in line with the requirements of a modern market economy and the needs of the country, restructuring technical base enterprises based on advanced, highly efficient technologies;

5. integration of the national economy into the system of world economic relations, the formation of an open economy. To do this, it is necessary to liberalize foreign trade and provide reliable legal and economic protection foreign investment, ensure true convertibility of the ruble.

The most important role in a transition economy is played by such priority measures as large-scale liberalization and consistent stabilization. Liberalization involves free pricing and the end of government control in trade. The importance of liberalization lies in its ability to overcome two fundamental shortcomings of a centralized economy: distorted incentives and limited information. Liberalization forces enterprises to focus on consumer demand and making profits in a competitive environment. It promotes pricing that corresponds to the real relationship between supply and demand, providing signal information to the manufacturer about the need for certain goods. Liberalization at the first stage inevitably leads to a jump in prices, and inflation interferes with the normal functioning of the economy. But, despite all the costs, liberalization makes it possible to break strict administrative ties between the state and enterprises and reduce subsidies, thereby creating conditions for stabilizing the economy.

Macroeconomic stabilization of the national economy means reducing inflation and the state budget deficit, ending preferential lending and excess money emission. Stabilization includes overcoming imbalances in the national economy and foreign economic sphere. With all the variety of methods, it usually includes measures such as control over money supply and its regulation, introduction of internal currency convertibility, regulation of the discount rate exchange rate and other, hard monetarist methods. However, in those countries where there is high social and political instability, the implementation of such a policy significantly increases social tension and is even fraught with a social explosion. In such conditions, soft methods of financial regulation are more effective.

After completion of macroeconomic stabilization and liberalization, the priority problems become issues related to the creation market institutions, fiscal policy.

Methods for solving problems of the transition period include:

1. Stabilization is an economic policy aimed at limiting inflation and saturating the market, which includes:

Liberalization of prices;

Minimization of the state budget (commercialization of the activities of state-owned enterprises);

Increase in the cost of credit (up to a maximum of 210% of the Central Bank rate);

Introduction of internal convertibility of the national currency;

Containment of income growth.

2. Transformation of forms of ownership:

Privatization (restitution - return of property former owners in a number of European countries);

Removing restrictions on private sector development.

3. Changing the structure of the economy:

Antimonopoly policy;

Conversion;

Bankruptcy mechanism;

Integration into the global market.

1.2 Main features and contradictions of the transition economy in Russia

The specificity of a transition economy is manifested in its special features:

1. Permanent reform, i.e. carrying out economic reform. Economic reform is a consciously carried out transformation aimed at changing existing economic relations. Reasons for economic reforms in different countries different - change objective conditions, political forces in power, the ineffectiveness of previously used tools for achieving economic or social goals. Their need arises regularly; they usually do not affect the deep foundations of the system. Reforms that seek to transform the system as a whole are of a different nature; they are longer lasting.

The first third of the 20th century was characterized by increased government intervention in the economy, the range of forms of which varied from the planned economy in the USSR to Roosevelt's New Deal. In economic theory, this period is characterized as the Keynesian revolution. Keynes's theory of government intervention dominated theory and practice for several decades and assumed that the market is inefficient and must be limited. In the last quarter of the 20th century, a period of economic reforms began, the meaning of which can be described as a market renaissance. Since the early 80s in the USA, England, USSR, of Eastern Europe, Asia began to strengthen market principles in the economy.

2. Economic crisis - transformational recession (Kornai), its features:

the crisis is universal in nature, has affected all spheres and sectors of the economy, its level is critical, and the crisis is becoming self-deepening;

long-term (nine years);

labor and capital are just beginning to be released from obsolete industries;

its degree does not correspond to a transformational decline, but is a consequence of a number of deviations in the Russian economic policy from world market standards:

Fear of the corporate market and focus on creating a market for enterprises (now being corrected through financial and industrial groups);

Establishing loan interest at a level below inflationary price increases in order to supply the private sector with funds for purchasing the public sector;

Sale of state property at symbolic prices, which blocks investment activity;

Setting energy prices several times higher average level prices (bringing them to world prices);

The introduction of internal convertibility of the ruble in the context of a gap between the dollar exchange rate and the real purchasing power of the ruble, which gives an inflationary effect;

Instability of the economic and political system.

The stability (sustainability) of the economic system is determined by:

1. Load – optimal satisfaction of needs through the use of limited resources. The historical level of consumption is inertial, therefore, in a crisis, the load on the weakened economic system increases.

2. The structure of the system – i.e. system of production relations - the old - planned economy is broken and a new - market economy - is built.

3. Rigidity - the ability to resist deformation. It characterizes the conservatism of the economic system, its ability to develop within the framework of a certain economic mechanism.

4. Imperfections of the system - deviations from the norm that weaken stability, but are easily eliminated.

The degree of instability of the transition economy, as already noted, is objectively high, which is due to the fact that the level of consumption (load) is decreasing (meat consumption decreased by 42%), but stability is not restored, since the state of the economic system can be described as prohibitive. The decrease in agricultural production and the income of most Russian families has led to a reduction and deterioration in the structure of food consumption. For 1990-1996 Only the consumption of potatoes increased, while other products decreased. Moreover, if on the eve of the reform (in 1990) the families of workers and employees (mainly urban families) consumed more milk and especially meat than the families of collective farmers (rural families), then by 1996 the situation had changed to the opposite, which is explained by the large role in the food supply of rural families of private farms, the potential of which has increased.

The shortage of domestic food has to be filled by importing food from abroad. The share of food imports, which reached 24% in the USSR in 1980 and decreased to 16% in 1990, began to grow again in Russia. In 1991-1994. it was 28%. In subsequent years it decreased slightly. The country has to spend significant foreign currency resources on food protection.

Analyzing the nature of contradictions modern economy transition period, it should be taken into account that the dialectic of duality is being replaced by the dialectic of multiplicity. Therefore, by analogy with Hegel’s dialectic of duality, the main contradiction in a transitional economy to a market economy should be considered the contradiction between the public and private (private-corporate) sectors, which is resolved in the process of struggle between them. However, abandoning the political concept of struggle, we can say that these sectors of the economy should not fight to expand their scale, but occupy an economic niche corresponding to the economic nature of each of these sectors, i.e. cover those sectors of production of material goods and services, for normal functioning which they provide the most favorable conditions.

The main contradictions of the transition economy are due to the existence of the following main obstacles to the establishment of a market economy:

1. Dominance of group interests. In a centrally controlled economy, the ruling elite consisted of enterprise directors, party and government officials (senior) - 5.9 million people (including clerks and family members). With the liquidation of state property, they lose control over the economy and their resistance is clearly visible in the example of agrarian reform, which is being slowed down in every possible way.

2. Anti-capitalist mentality: the subordination of the individual to the state must be replaced by a new economic psychology, compatible with the principle of freedom of enterprise, deep differentiation of income, and faith in personal strength.

3. Lack of trust in the government, in power, which is one of the obstacles to economic liberalization. It is due to constant changes in the economic course (at first they tried to reform the socialist system), and imperfect legislation. But the main thing has been achieved: private property has been constitutionally formalized.

4. The syndrome of market socialism, according to which it is considered possible to transition to a market (i.e., efficient) economy without private property, only on the basis of changing forms of management. The transition to a regulated market is being popularized, i.e. to market socialism. But the source of all redistribution processes is only production, an increase in taxes on which (i.e. on entrepreneurs) undermines production itself. The desire for social justice leads to its violation and the transition to the old state distribution of poverty-stricken incomes.

5. Mafia structures and corruption. The number of registered crimes in Russia in the 90s (identified and registered by internal affairs bodies as socially dangerous acts), provided for by criminal law, increased in Russia from 1.8 million in 1990 to 2.8 million in 1992-1993, and then, after a slight decline in 1997-1998, to almost 3.0 million in 1999-2001.

6. Regionalism and separatism - claims of regions to all their natural resources (Chechen Republic, Yakutia, Tyumen...).

The owner of all its natural resources can only be a territorial entity capable of independent survival in economic, political and military relations. If this is not the case, then the region cannot count on impunity for separatist aspirations (secession, isolation). Economic separatism excludes the organization of a rent taxation system, in which rent from natural resources, of which every citizen of Russia is an equal co-owner, is the optimal source of pensions and other social payments to citizens.

When preparing the article, the following materials were used:

1. Anisimov A. The true scale of the decline in production and a change in the model of Russian economic policy // Russian Economic Journal. 2003. No. 9.

2. Aukutsionek S.P. The theory of transition to the market. M., 2003.

3. Belokrylova O.S. Course of lectures on the theory of transition economy Rostov: RSU, 2001. Part 1., Topic 1.

4. Belokrylova O.S. Conceptual foundations of a transition economy // Butkevich V. Between past and future // Economics and life. 2005. No. 5.

5. Belokrylova O.S., Volchik V.V., Muradov A.A. Institutional features of income distribution in a transition economy. Rostov n/d: Publishing house Rost. University, 2000.

6. Buzgalin A.V. Transitional economy. Lecture course. M., 2006.

7. Grigoriev L.K. a new stage of transformation. // Economic Issues. No. 4. 2006

8. Gaidar E. State and evolution. M., 2005.

9. Kuzyk B. Development strategy: tasks of transition to a geo-economic model // REJ. No. 3. 2000.

10. Kulikov V. Social imperatives for continuing economic reform. // REJ. No. 1. 2000.

Introduction

1.Transition economy: concept, features, varieties, features, functions

2. Transformation recession as a phenomenon of a transition economy

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

Since 1992, Russia has been experiencing profound changes. In some other countries, mainly in Eastern Europe, change began even a little earlier.

The transition period in the economy is a historically short period of time during which the dismantling of the administrative-command system is completed and a system of basic market institutions is formed. This period of time is often called the period of post-socialist transformation.

Naturally, economic transformation is part of deep, usually fundamental changes in society - in the political and state-administrative structure, in the social sphere, in ideology, in domestic and foreign policy.

A change of system can proceed in different ways. In our country, the change of power in 1991 occurred after dramatic events - the suppression of the August putsch, the collapse of the USSR, the self-dissolution of the Supreme Council and the forced renunciation of power by the President of the USSR.

Let's take a closer look at what a transition economy is?

1.Transition economy: concept, features, varieties, features, functions

Transitional economy is a transitional state from one economic system to another economic system. As a result of this transition, a fundamental transformation of the foundations of this system is carried out, which determine the genesis and development of both new features of the transition economy and its features.

The following main features of a transition economy are identified.

1. The transition economy will have to create the basis of a new economic system, while the previous economy was reproduced on its basis. The term “basis” in economic theory is key and includes: the type of ownership of the means and products of production; forms of economic relations; type of coordination of activities between economic entities.

With the creation of the basis of the new economy, the transitional state of the economic system ends and it acquires a new quality.

2. An important feature of a transition economy is its diversity. An economic structure is understood as a type of economic relations that allows for the simultaneous coexistence in a given country of not only various forms, but also types of ownership. Thus, a transition economy is characterized by the presence of an old and a new basis, as well as the coexistence of various types of regulation of economic relations between economic entities.

3. A transition economy is characterized by unsustainable development, since there is a constant transformation of old relations in the absence of new institutions and rules, as a result of which! there is a conflict between old and new economic interests.

4. Transformations in a transition economy take a fairly long period, which is explained by a number of factors:

The complexity and inconsistency of transformations;

Natural factors;

The impossibility of simultaneously carrying out a revolution in the technological basis, modifying the economy, and forming new economic institutions.

Transitional economy and mixed economy characteristic common features:

Combination of market and government regulation;

Combination of capitalist forms and social orientation of economic development, etc.

At the same time, these types of economies also have qualitative differences. Let's note some of them.

Firstly, a mixed economy is a modern economic system that combines market and government regulation.

Secondly, the mixed economy as a modern economic system is dominant in most developed countries.

As for the transition economy, it:

It is not reproduced on its own economic basis, but is transferred from one economic system to another;

In contrast, a mixed economy is characterized by instability;

Covers a relatively short period of time, while a mixed economy is characterized by an unchanged state of the economic system.

The transition economy has several varieties:

1. The economy of the transition period from capitalism to socialism (in our country it covered the period from the Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917 to the 30s of the 20th century).

2. A fundamental change in the methods of coordination within the same economic system, but they relate to its basis and economic policy. This type of transition economy involves the inevitable replacement of old institutions, the development of new methods of regulation and the choice of new theories of social economic development.

3. The economic system of individual countries requires changes in connection with a change in the place of a particular country in the system of international economic and political relations. These changes are due to the need to eliminate deformations in the economies of former colonial countries.

4. Overcoming a long period of unstable economic development of states. An example of this type is, for example, countries Latin America, which have experienced low economic growth rates for more than two decades, increasing external debt, a sharp contrast in incomes of the population, high inflation, etc.

5. Transitional economy of the former Soviet republics of the USSR and other post-socialist countries. She wears an intersystem transition. The peculiarity of this transition economy is that there is a transition from a socialist economic system to a capitalist economic system, i.e. a reverse movement, or more precisely, a transition from a “pure” economic system to a mixed one.

In a modern mixed economy, the state must fulfill following functions:

1. Providing an institutional and legal basis for the activities of business entities (determination of rights and forms of ownership, conditions for concluding and fulfilling contracts, relationships between trade unions and employers, general principles of external economic activity etc.).

2. Eliminating or compensating for the negative effects of market behavior and satisfying people’s needs for public goods that the market cannot produce: resolving issues of national defense, ecology, education, science, healthcare, etc.

3. Carrying out economic policy aimed at:

Maintaining the normal functioning of the market mechanism;

Smoothing out cyclical fluctuations;

Coping with Consequences economic shocks;

Ensuring the preconditions for long-term economic growth (especially through fiscal, monetary and structural policies).

4.Implementation of active and principled antimonopoly policy.

5. Maintaining a stable social climate in society through the redistribution of available income.

6. Carrying out a stabilization policy of the state aimed at restoring and maintaining macroeconomic balance (in particular, full employment, stable level prices). There are formal and real stabilization. Formal stabilization is the achievement of a stable state according to one macroeconomic indicator (inflation, unemployment, and change in gross domestic income). Real stabilization means not only, for example, a reduction in unemployment, but the presence of conditions for economic growth. The transition to real stabilization presupposes the need to increase government demand, investment, and strict control over prices and incomes.

2. Transformation recession as a phenomenon of a transition economy

Throughout the 90s, until 1999. Russian economy was in a state of protracted economic recession, reaching its highest point in the crisis year of 1998. Economic recession was preceded by the stagnation of the Soviet economy in the 80s, to overcome which the concept of accelerating development, developed during the years of perestroika, was aimed at its time. However, the potential for the development of socialism was completely exhausted by that time, which was reflected in its inability to provide further the economic growth. The hopelessness of the situation doomed the attempt to resuscitate socialism to failure, which ended in its death. Since 1990, economic growth has stopped, even according to official data. A protracted transformational decline began.

The term “transformational decline” was introduced into scientific circulation by the Hungarian scientist J. Kornai. He argued that during the transition from an administrative-command system to a market economy experiences deep crisis, caused by the transitional, transformational state of the economic system. It is expressed in the fact that the previous, planned mechanisms for organizing economic coordination have already been destroyed, and new market mechanisms are still weak or absent altogether.

A transition economy is no longer a planned economy, but also not a market economy. Between different types of economy, between different economic systems, there lies a long period of transition, which, by definition, is not capable of ensuring immediate economic recovery due to a radical transformation of the entire system of economic and other relations. Therefore, this is inevitable in any transition economy. There have been many transitional periods in the centuries-old history of mankind, when there was a change in economic, and therefore all other social relations.

The transition period from a planned to a market economy, from socialism to capitalism, is no exception. None of the post-socialist countries managed to avoid the transformational recession, although the scale of the decline in production varied.

The PRC was an exception, but Chinese reformers do not consciously classify their country as a post-socialist country.

The depth and duration of the transformational decline in all post-socialist countries turned out to be different. In this sense, Russia is among the “record holders” both in its duration and in its destructive power, yielding the palm to only a few of the CIS countries.

What are the reasons that give rise to the transformational decline in the economy of the transition period? It seems appropriate to distinguish two groups of them. The first includes those generated by previous development, the second - the circumstances of the transition period itself as such.

Let's focus on the first group. The inevitability of a transformational recession is determined by the need for partial destruction of the macroeconomic structure inherited from the past due to the following circumstances:

Changes in the criterion of balance due to changes in economic systems;

The need to overcome the contradictions of socialism, the materialization of which this structure is, which is most clearly visible in the structural and technological imbalances inherent in it.

In connection with the change in the criterion of macroeconomic balance, the problem of global restructuring is being raised, aimed at overcoming imbalances inherited from the past, which are such in Soviet period were not interpreted.

As already noted, the structural imbalance is manifested in the presence of excess production capacity for the new system of economic relations in heavy industry, in the military-industrial complex - in particular, which is associated with the end of the Cold War in the 80s due to the end of the global confrontation. The elimination of excess capacity was achieved in various ways, including the conversion of military-industrial complex industries, re-profiling, restructuring and even bankruptcy of unprofitable and unpromising enterprises of the first division. An inevitable consequence of these processes was the deindustrialization of the inherited scientific and production potential, since it was in the production capacities subject to reduction (and these are, first of all, the military-industrial complex branches and those predominantly working for it) that high-tech, knowledge-intensive production was concentrated. In the civilian complex, on the contrary, the capacity was clearly insufficient to satisfy internal needs. But the paradox was that the industries of this particular complex suffered the most destruction. The reason was their technological backwardness, which was fully revealed in connection with liberalization foreign economic activity, which placed them in a relationship of disastrous competition with the outside world.

As a result, there was a general decline in industrial production, which least affected only the fuel and energy sector, whose products over the past decades have remained in constant demand in foreign markets, which maintains a high level of prices for them. All these circumstances led to an increase in the share of extractive industries, although not so significant, given the higher decline in manufacturing industries. However, we can talk about the degradation of the macroeconomic structure if we approach it from the position of modern standards of the ratio of mining and manufacturing industries demonstrated by developed countries. So far, only the first steps have been taken in transforming the inherited structure of the national economy, which has made it possible to begin eliminating the most obvious imbalances. But this is also important for ensuring the conditions for the revival of economic growth.

No less significant are the circumstances generated by the transition period itself that contributed to the transformational decline.

Among them, we note the most significant:

The disintegration crisis that accompanied the death of socialism, and this is the collapse of the world socialist system, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) and even a number of countries (USSR, Czechoslovakia, SFRY);

The duration of the process of forming a new class of owners as investment subjects;

The absence of money capital, the accumulation of which already in the transition period lengthened the formation of industrial capital;

Massive outflow of money capital accumulated in the country abroad;

Widespread general criminalization of economic activity.

The disintegration crisis was expressed in the collapse of the world socialist system and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, and at the same time traditional economic ties, which had developed over decades within these formations, which could not but become a factor in reducing the growth rate in the countries that were part of them. However, the most destructive consequences were the collapse of the USSR, and with it the collapse of a single national economic complex that had been formed over three quarters of a century, a single economic space. Yes, according to expert assessments, this circumstance accounts for one third of the decline in the Russian economy.

The suspension of economic growth is also inevitable due to a radical transformation of state property relations. With the destruction of the old system of economic relations, the class of former owners leaves the historical arena, but a new one is by no means instantly born. Meanwhile, as is known, investment activities, ensuring economic growth, forms the function of the owner of the objects real sector economy, allowing him to maintain his social status multiplication and qualitative improvement of these objects, using for these purposes various sources available to him investment funds, own and borrowed, internal and external. The formation of a class of owners occurs in the process of primary capital formation. At the same time, the historically and logically initial form of capital is money. Money capital not only, by definition, could not appear in the Soviet period, but also the forced savings of the population, calculated on the eve of market transformation in billions of rubles, did not have time to take the form of money capital. This was due to their complete depreciation in the conditions of hyperinflation that resulted from the liberalization of prices in January 1992 in the chronically scarce and over-monopolized Soviet economy. But without monetary capital, participation in the monetary stage of privatization is excluded, especially since in an industrial, and also extremely rich natural resources the country was talking about appropriation on a huge scale. Thus, the national wealth of the USSR in 1985 was calculated at an astronomical amount of 3.6 trillion. rub. - without the cost of land, subsoil, forests. The cost of fixed production assets was 2.34 trillion. rub.

The division and redistribution of such wealth in itself requires not only considerable time, but also the presence of comparable amounts of monetary capital. The absence of such at the starting point was one of the main economic reasons carrying out free privatization at the first stage, although it was by no means the largest and not the best part state property. But soon it was followed by money. In addition, the post-voucher redistribution of property began almost immediately, participation in which is also unthinkable without monetary capital. The acute and urgent need for monetary capital to a large extent fueled criminal methods of fighting competitors for objects of appropriation.

Let us note that, from this point of view, spontaneous privatization was of a forced nature, especially since it was carried out - even before the official proclamation of market reforms - on one scale or another in all post-socialist countries. There was no monetary capital as such, but at the same time it was possible to fully and with impunity use the administrative resource in the conditions of the ensuing chaos. Therefore, it is quite understandable that its subjects were, first of all, representatives of the powerful nomenklatura, as well as representatives of large shadow businesses, who by that time had the opportunity to legalize their capital on the basis of essentially pro-market laws newly adopted at that time.

So, it takes a long time for new owners to appear. In addition, the first of them, who appeared during the years of voucher privatization, very often turned out to be temporary workers who, for one reason or another, lost acquired objects during the post-voucher redistribution of property that began. It also took time to accumulate monetary capital. And although victory at auctions and tenders was ensured not only by money, but also by many accompanying circumstances, such as the degree of proximity of applicants to power structures, bribery of government officials at various levels, the ability to successfully lobby for conflicting deals, etc., their participants still had to shell out hundreds of millions of dollars, and at the beginning of the new century the bill reached billions. But they had to be accumulated, starting essentially from scratch. Various methods of such accumulation have been developed by the history of the formation of capitalism and have been greatly enhanced by the Russian practice of primary capital formation in the dashing 90s. But in any case, a time lag is inevitable between the formation of monetary and industrial capital, which in itself acts as a factor in the transformational decline.

The duration of the transformational recession increases even more if the monetary capital accumulated in the country rushes abroad. And this is quite natural in conditions of economic, political and other instability inherent in any transition economy, in conditions when a favorable investment climate has long been formed behind transparent and easily surmountable borders. According to expert estimates, in the 90s, about 200-300 billion dollars of capital accumulated in the country were taken out of Russia, not to mention the damage caused to the economy by the so-called brain drain, the losses from which are no less significant.

As we see, many circumstances inherent in a transition economy not only limit economic growth, but also give rise to the exact opposite phenomenon - transformation recession of different durations and destructive power, depending on the specific historical conditions of a particular post-socialist country. The transition from recession to growth occurs as capital masters the real sector of the economy, as a favorable investment climate in the country, not only stopping the outflow of domestic capital abroad, but also stimulating the influx of foreign capital. Such a process has clearly emerged in the Russian economy in recent years, starting in 1999. At the same time, any aggravation of relations between government structures and the largest Russian companies without convincing representatives big business reasons is fraught with the danger of worsening the situation for national economy from the point of view of the influx of foreign capital and the outflow of domestic capital. And in any case, the transition from recovery economic growth to investment growth is being held back.

All these processes and phenomena that generate and feed the transformational decline are clearly visible not only in the transitional Russian economy, but also in the economies of other post-socialist countries, although due to the specifics of each of them they occur in different ways. But in any case, as a critical mass of genuine owners emerge, capable of moving from the initial, that is, non-reproductive, accumulation of capital to reproductive accumulation, the transformation trail becomes the starting point of economic growth.

Various countries with economies in transition are characterized by extremely uneven dynamics of macroeconomic indicators. With a certain convention, they can be divided into the following types:

1) countries that, at the first stage of transformation, were characterized by a kind of “macroeconomic hole”: a significant (crisis) decline in production volumes and GDP in 1990-92. followed by a sharp slowdown in decline and exit in 1993-1994. (and in Poland - already in 1992) on a growth trajectory. This group includes Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Hungary, with a somewhat less confident exit from the “hole” - Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Armenia. In Bulgaria in 1996-97. economic growth again gave way to a catastrophic decline; in Albania, a severe political crisis led to the complete collapse of statehood; in Latvia and Romania, growth remained very slow and unstable.

2) countries whose economies are in a state of continuous, unevenly slowing decline.

The countries of Eastern Europe passed the “bottom” of the economic recession in the first half of the 90s. In the mid-90s. almost all of them entered the growth stage, except for Bulgaria, where in 1996-1997. economic situation sharply worsened again. At the end of the 90s. Eastern Europe as a whole, and especially those states where market reforms were vigorously and consistently implemented, approached pre-crisis levels and even surpassed them (Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia). The Polish economy is developing at a particularly high rate, which has already significantly exceeded the level of the late 80s.

Unlike Russia, where the most stable enterprises of the mining complex turned out to be, in Eastern Europe those industries that occupy a “middle” position in the technological chain showed the greatest viability. These are industries that produce products with low added value: textiles, food, woodworking, printing, etc. They do not require large investments, are focused mainly on consumer demand, which had stabilized by the mid-90s, and have a comparative advantage in costs on the world market.

Almost all of the growth is ensured by the expansion of the “new private sector,” i.e., private firms created in recent years “from scratch” and not burdened with the typical problems of state-owned and privatized enterprises (outdated equipment, surplus labor, the presence of social facilities, etc.). d.). Private enterprises quickly appeared in the above-mentioned industries, demonstrating relative stability in the difficult conditions of the transition period.

For example, in Poland in the early 90s, when the country was experiencing “shock therapy”, private sector was the only growing area of the economy. In 1993, production in this sector, including companies with foreign participation, according to official data, increased by 35%, while at state-owned enterprises production decreased by 6%. For a long time, private enterprises accounted for more than 50% of Poland's GDP, and we are talking about the “new private sector”, because there was virtually no privatization in Poland at that time. In fact, the private sector's share was even higher because its performance is not fully reflected in statistics. In Hungary, the share of the private sector in 1993 was estimated at 30% of GDP.

Production is also rapidly increasing at new enterprises built foreign companies(they usually prefer new construction to the acquisition of old plants, which require expensive modernization, settlement of relations with other owners and settlement of labor conflicts).

It is noteworthy that the economic policies of Eastern European countries are very pragmatic and are little bound by the political ideology of the new governments that replaced the radical liberals in 1993-1995. To strengthen monetary system, developing market institutions and solving acute budgetary problems, new leaders are usually forced to cut government spending and privatize state property no less energetically than the reformers of the early 90s.

This situation is especially typical for Bulgaria, Hungary and Poland. It was the “left” governments of these countries in the mid-90s. started to “privatize” the system social security and blocked attempts by orthodox political groups to restore elements of the administrative command economy(in Bulgaria - by re-establishing agricultural cooperatives, in Poland - by renationalizing banks).

The experience of Eastern Europe has shown that, despite the rapid development of the “new private sector” and the influx of foreign capital, the dynamics of economic growth largely depend on the condition of the bulk of state-owned and privatized enterprises. This dependence manifests itself in two ways:

first of all, no improvement financial situation the majority of enterprises cannot be expected to expand the production of ordinary, mass and standard products for the domestic market;

secondly, the crisis in the real sector deprives the state tax revenue and, on the contrary, forces him to divert huge amounts of money into subsidies, price subsidies, unemployment benefits and other forms of support for enterprises and workers. Because of this, the state is unable to fulfill its budget obligations for other items of expenditure, which results in a budget deficit and increased inflation.

The budget deficit, as in Russia, was initially covered by the issue of government securities. This led to the well-known phenomenon - the “crowding out effect”, i.e. the distraction of scarce financial resources from the real sector. Banks preferred to invest money not in production, but in reliable securities, issued by the state. This led to an even greater “investment famine” and a decline in production.

To break this "vicious circle", Eastern European countries carried out extensive campaigns of bank resolution and enterprise restructuring.

In Yugoslavia, the dynamics of GDP were initially similar to the dynamics of the GDP of the Transcaucasian republics (increasingly deepening recession). But then there is a sudden transition from a 27.7% contraction to economic growth. Unlike other countries of Central and Eastern Europe, Yugoslavia achieved economic growth not 2-4 years after the start of the financial stabilization program, but almost immediately after its start.

By all the above parameters, the Russian economy had the most “favorable” conditions for a deep transformation crisis at the beginning of the transition period. The production structure was sharply skewed towards the high share of the first division, group “A” in the industry, with a significant development of military-industrial complex production. The service sector was poorly developed. In the field of engineering and technology, the economy occupied leading positions only in a number of industries (space, military equipment), generally had weak competitiveness in world markets, and was weighed down by a mass of outdated equipment. The task of reforming in the field of market relations was especially difficult: it was necessary to recreate market institutions “out of nothing.” The development of production for the sake of production determined relatively low level life of the population, which meant the absence in society of a certain “margin of safety” conducive to its radical reform. The deep penetration of the socialist mentality into society became one of the reasons for the severity of the struggle of political forces in the process of transformation and the weakness of democratic forces. Unfounded, unjustifiably optimistic statements by the country's leadership about overcoming difficulties in a year and a half gave rise to corresponding expectations of the population and, even more deeply, disappointment when they were not realized.

At the beginning of the transition period, many assumed that Russia would develop a liberal economy, similar, for example, to the economic system of the United States. However, practice has shown that the question of the ultimate goal of transformation is much more complicated. The peculiarities of Russia's historical experience cannot be cast aside. Russia cannot be like the USA, or Germany, or any other country. While remaining original, it must take everything positive from world experience.

One thing is clear: Russia must develop along the path of a market and democratic state. The market is deeply connected to democracy. This connection is due, firstly, to the fact that a private owner should see in the state not an enemy, but an ally and patron capable of protecting his property rights. Confidence in the inviolability of their economic and political rights allows the owner to develop his business on the basis of a long-term and thoughtful strategy. Secondly, democracy provides conditions under which important government decisions are adopted in the interests of the majority and, therefore, favor those directions and areas of economic activity that are the most promising at any given point in time.

The historical path of our country, combined with universal socio-economic trends (megatrends), indicates that the ultimate goal of the transition period should be a social market economy.

The future mixed model of the Russian economy, which will be the result of the transition period, should have the following main features:

Organic unity and interaction between the market and the state, in which private property and market mechanisms for resource distribution are combined with reliable protection state competition and other “rules of the game”, active participation of the state in the production of “public goods” and in the development of the social sphere;

The presence of developed market institutions that form an integral interconnected system and are capable of ensuring rapid growth due to the mobility of all factors of production and their efficient use;

Socially oriented economy that meets high modern requirements for the quality of labor, creative motivation of labor and entrepreneurial activity, humanization of relations in production, the state of education, science, healthcare, culture, environment;

Social partnership, based on developed institutions of civil society and democratic government.

Conclusion

The transition period is a historically short period of time during which the dismantling of the administrative-command system is completed and a system of basic market institutions is formed. One of the relatively simple forms of dismantling is economic liberalization. But the market behavior of economic entities can only rely on market institutions. Therefore, institutional transformation is primary in relation to other areas of reform.

At the early stage of reforms, the central task was to suppress inflation, ensure macroeconomic stabilization and liberalize the economy. During the reforms, most countries were forced to take drastic and painful measures for the national economy and population “ shock therapy" Successful financial stabilization, along with the formation of market institutions, allows us to move to the stage of economic growth. At the third, final stage of reforms, there should be modern structure economy.

The theory and practice of transformation make it possible to identify several patterns of the transition period. These are a change in the role of the state, macroeconomic stabilization, privatization, transformational decline and integration into world economy. The historical path of our country, combined with universal socio-economic trends, indicates that the ultimate goal of post-socialist transformation for Russia is a social market economy.

Economics /ed. A.I.Arkhipova, A.K.Bolshakova - M., 2008.- P.627

Economics /ed. A.I.Arkhipova, A.K.Bolshakova - M., 2008.- P.537

Introduction

1.Transition economy: concept, features, varieties, features, functions

2. Transformation recession as a phenomenon of a transition economy

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

Since 1992, Russia has been experiencing profound changes. In some other countries, mainly in Eastern Europe, change began even a little earlier.

Let's take a closer look at what a transition economy is?

1.Transition economy: concept, features, varieties, features, functions

The following main features of a transition economy are identified.

With the creation of the basis of the new economy, the transitional state of the economic system ends and it acquires a new quality.

2. An important feature of a transition economy is its diversity. An economic structure is understood as a type of economic relations that allows for the simultaneous coexistence in a given country of not only different forms, but also types of property. Thus, a transition economy is characterized by the presence of an old and a new basis, as well as the coexistence of various types of regulation of economic relations between economic entities.

4. Transformations in a transition economy take a fairly long period, which is explained by a number of factors:

The complexity and inconsistency of transformations;

Natural factors;

The impossibility of simultaneously carrying out a revolution in the technological basis, modifying the economy, and forming new economic institutions.

Transition economies and mixed economies have common features:

Combination of market and government regulation;

Combination of capitalist forms and social orientation of economic development, etc.

At the same time, these types of economies also have qualitative differences. Let's note some of them.

Firstly, a mixed economy is a modern economic system that combines market and government regulation.

Secondly, the mixed economy as a modern economic system is dominant in most developed countries.

As for the transition economy, it:

It is not reproduced on its own economic basis, but is transferred from one economic system to another;

In contrast, a mixed economy is characterized by instability;

Covers a relatively short period of time, while a mixed economy is characterized by an unchanged state of the economic system.

The transition economy has several varieties:

1. The economy of the transition period from capitalism to socialism (in our country it covered the period from the Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917 to the 30s of the 20th century).

4. Overcoming a long period of unstable economic development of states. An example of this type is, for example, the countries of Latin America, which have experienced low economic growth rates, growing external debt, a sharp contrast in incomes, high inflation, etc. for more than two decades.

In a modern mixed economy, the state must perform the following functions:

3. Carrying out economic policy aimed at:

Maintaining the normal functioning of the market mechanism;

Smoothing out cyclical fluctuations;

Overcoming the consequences of economic shocks;

Ensuring the preconditions for long-term economic growth (especially through fiscal, monetary and structural policies).

4. Implementation of an active and principled antimonopoly policy.

5. Maintaining a stable social climate in society through the redistribution of available income.

6. Carrying out a stabilization policy of the state aimed at restoring and maintaining macroeconomic balance (in particular, full employment, stable price levels). There are formal and real stabilization. Formal stabilization is the achievement of a stable state according to one macroeconomic indicator (inflation, unemployment, and change in gross domestic income). Real stabilization means not only, for example, a reduction in unemployment, but the presence of conditions for economic growth. The transition to real stabilization presupposes the need to increase government demand, investment, and strict control over prices and incomes.

2. Transformation recession as a phenomenon of a transition economy

Throughout the 90s, until 1999, the Russian economy was in a state of protracted economic recession, reaching its highest point in the crisis year of 1998. The economic recession was preceded by the stagnation of the Soviet economy in the 1980s, to overcome which the concept of accelerating development, developed during the years of perestroika, was aimed at overcoming it. However, the development potential of socialism was completely exhausted by that time, which was reflected in its inability to ensure further economic growth. The hopelessness of the situation doomed the attempt to resuscitate socialism to failure, which ended in its death. Since 1990, economic growth has stopped, even according to official data. A protracted transformational decline began.

The term “transformational decline” was introduced into scientific circulation by the Hungarian scientist J. Kornai. He argued that during the transition from an administrative-command system to a market, the economy is experiencing a deep crisis caused by the transitional, transformational state of the economic system. It is expressed in the fact that the previous, planned mechanisms for organizing economic coordination have already been destroyed, and new market mechanisms are still weak or absent altogether.

Transition economy

Transition economy- an economy undergoing a transition from one state to another, during which a radical transformation of the entire socio-economic system occurs, property relations, institutions and management tools, goals and means of economic development are transformed. In relation to the Russian Federation, a transition economy corresponds to the transition from a centrally controlled Soviet economy to a market economy.

Research approaches

Currently, various approaches to the study of transition processes occurring in the economies of post-socialist countries are being proposed. The complexity and versatility of the problem of transition (transformation) of the economy from one type to another, according to a number of authoritative researchers, lies both in the deep root foundations of individual transformation processes and in their interaction.

Notes

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what “Transition Economy” is in other dictionaries:

Transition economy- Transition economy - See Transition economy... Economic and mathematical dictionary

transition economy- The economy of the transition period, when the country simultaneously operates elements of both a planned and market economy... Dictionary of Geography

A country's economy- (National economy) The economy of a country is social relations to ensure the wealth of the country and the well-being of its citizens. The role of the national economy in the life of the state, the essence, functions, sectors and indicators of the country’s economy, the structure of countries... ... Investor Encyclopedia

Noun, g., used. compare often Morphology: (no) what? economy, why? economy, (see) what? economy, what? economics, about what? about economics; pl. What? economy, (no) what? economics, why? economics, (see) what? economy, what? economies, oh... ... Dmitriev's Explanatory Dictionary

Macroeconomics- (Macroeconomics) Macroeconomics is a science that studies global economic processes Definition of the concept of macroeconomics, macroeconomic policy, functions and models of macroeconomic development, macroeconomic instability and her... ... Investor Encyclopedia

Inflation- (Inflation) Inflation is depreciation monetary unit, reducing it purchasing power general information about inflation, types of inflation, what is the economic essence, causes and consequences of inflation, indicators and inflation index, how... ... Investor Encyclopedia

Vitaly Leonidovich Tambovtsev Russian economist, professor at Moscow State University Date of birth: January 1, 1947 (1947 01 01) (65 years old) Citizenship ... Wikipedia

Russian economist, professor at Moscow State University Date of birth: January 1, 1947 (62 years old) ... Wikipedia

Vitaly Leonidovich Tambovtsev Russian economist, professor at Moscow State University Date of birth: January 1, 1947 (62 years old) ... Wikipedia

Tambovtsev, Vitaly Leonidovich Vitaly Leonidovich Tambovtsev Russian economist, professor at Moscow State University Date of birth ... Wikipedia

Books

Economic theory For bachelors and specialists, 4th edition Standard of the third generation, G. Vechkanov. The textbook examines the general foundations of economic theory, microeconomics, mesoeconomics, macroeconomics, transitional economics and the world economy. Widely used in this work...

Transition economy is an economic system that exists during the period of transition from one socio-economic system to another.

During this period, social and economic systems will radically change and transform, there will be a general transformation of relations in matters of property, mechanisms and tools in the management sphere will change, and both the means and goals of economic development will completely change.

In the case of Russia, as well as countries post-Soviet space, the term transition economy is applicable during the period of transition from a model of centralized economic management to new economy market type.

Read also about the transition economy on ANSWR

In modern classical economic theory, the market economy is studied as a stable, orderly and equilibrium system that is in a state of progressive development.

At the end of the twentieth century, during the period of transition industrial society in the post-industrial period, a new science of transitology was formed, which studies theoretical basis economic transformations. Thus, transitology is the science of the economy of the transition period. The subject of this science is problematic issues of transformation of the economic system.

The subject of transitology research is the economic system of a specific country (or countries) that is in a transitional state, from one qualitative level to another.

The peculiarity of a transition economy is that, in fact, at the same time the economic system has character traits two, often diametrically opposed, systems at once. These features of a transition economy make it more than a process of reforming some parts and elements, it is a process of changing the entire existing system of economic relations.

Classification of transient processes by nature and type

In the process of analyzing the history of economic processes, it was revealed that in the process of development there are several types of transition economies, differing from each other in scale, as well as in the characteristics of the processes.

By scale, it is customary to divide economic processes into:

According to this classification, a local transition economy exists in a certain separate area, region or country.

At its core, the local economy of the transition period contains specific economic processes that are inherent in a given region, and that make the economy of a given region unique and distinctive from the economies of other countries and regions. In terms of scale, the local transition economy is an economy of the original type.

By global transition economy we mean a general process of change occurring on the scale of the world economy or even the entire civilization; as a rule, experts distinguish between Eastern and Western civilizations.

Naturally, global processes, by definition, are not possible without the inclusion of local economic changes in them; it is thanks to these local changes that large-scale advances of a global nature occur.

However, global processes can also develop as a result of certain global factors, such as the global division of labor. Global change processes have always taken place throughout the existence of human society.

For example, we can take the process of dividing human civilization into Western and Eastern civilizations in the 1st millennium BC. At this stage of development of our society, there are all the prerequisites that the unification of these two civilizations will soon occur.

Based on how the processes proceed, two types of transition economies are also distinguished:

natural evolutionary;
and reformist-revolutionary.

The first type occurs during the natural course of history, the second - when it arises in society, often in the case of revolutionary cardinal processes, programs and directions of development of society, including in the economic sphere. One example of the second type of transition economy can be considered the experience of implementing L. Erhard's program in Germany after the end of the Second World War.

Some economic schools They believe that these types of transition economies are very rare in their pure form. In most cases, they are intertwined; in fact, this is a transitional economic system. It is quite obvious that any reform will accelerate (or slow down) the course of natural economic evolution.

As an example, we can consider the reform of 1861 in Russia, which was aimed at accelerating the transition from the traditional structure of the economy to an economy of a new capitalist, that is, market type. Stolypin's reforms can be considered a logical continuation of these reforms.

In fact, these economic reforms can be compared with the socio-political revolutions that took place in Russia.

The end of the twentieth century was marked by a massive transition from an administrative-command economic system to a market one in many countries of the world. In general, the methods for making these transitions can be divided into two types.

This is a transition through the creation of special economic institutions (China, as well as Hungary in Europe, did this), or the path of “shock” therapy (this type is typical for most countries of Eastern Europe, including Russia).

The classic form of such a transition was demonstrated by Poland in the 90s.

The difference between these options lies not only in the timing of the changes, but also in the volume of regulated sectors, the chosen stabilization measures, and the degree of coverage of industries.

Contrary to popular belief that the choice of transition path depends on the political will of the country's leadership, economists believe that the choice of one path or another is determined by a whole complex of social, political and economic factors.

Most often, the shock option is due to the current difficult circumstances in the country’s economy, financial imbalance, commodity shortages and structural disturbances in sectors of the economy that remain from the previous system of economic relations.

Main features of a transition economy

A transition economy is a normal evolutionary state of an economic system, when the economy operates during a period of transition from one stage of the evolution of society to another, often this is a period of economic, political and social change. Based on this, the features of a transition economy distinguish it from a “regular” economic system. Among these specific features are:

Slowness (inertia) of the reproduction process.
Development of new forms, elements and economic institutions.

Often these features are identified as the main problems of a transition economy.

The first feature (inertia) is explained by the fact that due to constant looking back at the previous stage, a quick replacement of economic forms and relations with new ones is not possible, no matter how much one would like it.

It is this phenomenon that explains the persistence of remnants of old economic relationships over a fairly large period of time.

But since the process of evolution cannot be stopped, new forms and new relationships will arise and develop. New economic institutions develop especially intensively if there is a planned reform program.

The effectiveness of reforms increases if they are not carried out spontaneously, but are based on economic laws.

During this period, the role of subjective factors increases, ultimately determining the ways of implementing reforms and their practical significance.

Main features characteristic of a transition economy

In economic theory, the main features of a transition economy are identified, there are at least five of them.

The economy in transition is characterized by its variability, which upsets the equilibrium. This feature is inherent in any type of transition economy; it ensures both the dynamism of the development of the process and the uncertainty of the prospects for the development of the economic system.

Mixing new and old.

The features of a transition economy are manifested in the interweaving of new and old forms of economic management; they are a litmus test for the fact that the process has really begun, it is underway and, in the opinion of many experts, indicates the irreversibility of the process.

It is a factor in the multivariate development of events and indicates the possibility of choosing the most favorable development option.

This feature concerns not so much the functioning of the economy as the emerging contradictions between layers of society and the economic entities behind them. The aggravation of contradictions is so strong that it can lead to revolutionary upheavals and social cataclysms.

The economy of the transition period itself is of a historical nature, which undoubtedly depends on the characteristics of the region. This means that the same patterns of economic processes manifest themselves differently in each country.

It is quite obvious that when forming economic development programs, the main features of a transition economy should be taken into account in order to prevent possible errors and miscalculations.

Russian transition economy and its features

Despite the fact that economic processes in Russia follow the same pattern as in most countries of the world, Russia's transition economy has a number of its own unique features. There are also problems in the transition economy that are unique to Russia.

This term means that the transition to a market economy occurs not from the traditional way of life, but from a specific type of “socialist” economy that has developed over 70 years.

The Russian transition economy as an economic and social system undoubtedly leaves its imprint on the course of transformations. Moreover, the course of the process is not entirely predictable, since there are simply no analogues in world history.

Russia again, as after 1917, acts as a pioneer.

The fact is that the basic concepts of a market economy are not completely alien to Russia. Many concepts were simply “erased” from people’s consciousness by Soviet ideology and way of life. Today there is a return to lost values.

The features of a transition economy are enhanced by globalization processes. World processes simply cannot help but influence Russia, and the transient processes and to the main landmarks. Therefore, the Russian transition economy represents a unique interweaving of local trends and development directions.

The transitional economy of Russia is connected with its geographical location, as a link connecting the economies of Western and Eastern civilization. This feature leaves its mark not only on management styles, but also on the mentality of the residents.

Tasks of Russia's transition economy

The transition to a new economic system is a difficult process and requires clearly defined tasks:

Liberalization of the economic system. It is difficult, but vitally important for Russia to abandon prohibitions and restrictions, as well as excessive state control in all economic spheres. Therefore, the state plays an important and complex role in a transition economy.
Demonopolization. The essence is to create an environment of true competition in the country, that is equal conditions for doing business by absolutely all business entities.
Structural transformations. Such transformations that will eliminate imbalances both in the economic system as a whole and in its individual sectors in particular.
Stabilization of macroeconomic parameters. This means controlling inflation, money issue, balancing the state budget.
Social protection. Since ordinary people suffer from economic reforms that are not always popular, it is necessary to have a clearly functioning social sphere. the task of social services should be to facilitate the adaptation of the population to new economic conditions.
Institutional transformations include the creation of the private sector, a functioning market infrastructure, and the creation of effective legislation adapted to market conditions.

Stay up to date with all the important events of United Traders - subscribe to our telegram channel

Differences between the transition economy of Russia and other countries

Definition 1

A transition economy is an evolutionary process of changing the state of an economic system, occurring through the transition from one stage of the evolution of society to another. This period is accompanied not only economic changes, but also political and social.

Accordingly, a transition economy has its own distinctive features. In different countries, transition economies have their own characteristics.

In Russia, the main processes also proceed according to a standard pattern, as in other countries of the world, but nevertheless, the transition economy taking place in Russia has some unique features inherent only to our country. In addition to the peculiarities, there are also some problems of the transition economy, which are also characteristic only of Russia.

The transformation process taking place in the former socialist countries formed after the collapse of the USSR should be characterized as a process of transition to a new economic system.

Such a transition economy has some distinctive features from those varieties of transition economies when the transition is carried out within the framework of the same system.

In the case of Russia, all economic fundamentals are being transformed.

Can not understand anything?

Try asking your teachers for help

The initial position of the country in the process of transition economy

The starting position of society during the transition economy was some version of socialism. The name given to this type of socialism today is the most common and it sounds like an administrative-command system. The final point in the transition of the economy from the administrative-command system was a capitalist market, mixed economy.

A centrally planned economy is characterized by several features:

High degree of government intervention in national resources;
Accordingly, the market is under pressure;
The dominant position of scarcity of resources and goods;
High level of state monopoly in the spheres of the national economy and in relation to external activities;
An established, ineffective and complex system of general planning;
The situation in the political, ideological and legal spheres corresponds to this state of the economy.

The main way to organize the production of socially significant goods and distribute the entire volume of resources due to dense government intervention in all major volumes of resources was the systematic management economic activity directive and command nature, which is considered the complete opposite of the competition inherent in the capitalist economic system.

Formed planning bodies that determine and evaluate the amount of resources and volume public needs a larger number of economic entities and the population were engaged in planning and distribution of resources, as well as manufactured products between enterprises and industries. At the same time, the issuance of mandatory tasks was organized direct use, which were established more according to political criteria rather than economic needs.

The existing state monopoly on foreign trade and most of the domestic market, also extended to banking activities.

The almost complete absence of the labor market also characterized the administrative-command system of Russia in the initial state of the transition economy.

The process of reproduction of labor power occurred to a greater extent through public consumption funds.

The labor market was distributed mainly across industries and regions, not in accordance with the cost of labor, and especially not at the will of its bearers, that is, the citizens of the country, but mainly through planning bodies, through specific social methods: the so-called “appeals”, the meaning of which was that the labor force was directed to certain areas of work, the mobilization of the labor force took place, based on ideological influence on the entire population.

The results of the implementation of a centralized planned economy was the actual growing lag of countries with a socialist structure from groups of countries with a bourgeois developed system, which were superior in production efficiency, the totality of successfully operating economic, social and political freedoms, more high level life of the population. It is these reasons, characterizing the economic inefficiency of this system, that served as the impetus for the fall of this economic system in most countries.

Note 1

The idea of a transition economy was a move away from an ineffective centrally planned economy, which was supposed to transform into the most efficient market economy.

Distinctive features of Russia's transition economy

Unprecedented. It is expressed in the fact that the initial state of society, the initial state of the country was not the traditional way of life, but a specific, special type of socialist economy that took shape over 70 years. Russia is a pioneer. There are no analogues of such a transition in world history.
Returnability. The fact is that some features of a market economy for Russia have been very laws since the times of Tsarist Russia. Many rules were removed from people's consciousness in Soviet times through Soviet ideology and the habituation of the population to a special way of life. During Russia's transition to a market economic system, lost values are returned.
Globalization. Due to the fact that Russia occupies a significant role in world processes, which cannot but influence the country, the transition processes themselves and the main guidelines, the features of the transition economy under the influence of these global world processes are intensifying. Therefore, the transition economy of Russia is a unique interweaving of various directions of development and local trends.
Territoriality. Geographical position The country is inevitably associated with a transition economy, since the country is the link that connects the economies of Western and Eastern civilizations. Such a distinctive feature inevitably leaves its mark on the style of economic activity and on the mentality of the residents.

Transition economy in Russia

Introduction

Chapter 1., functions and goals of development of the national economy in the transition period

1.1 The concept of a transition economy and its main features:

1.2 Patterns of functioning of a transition economy

1.3 Main goals and objectives of the transition period and ways to solve them:

Chapter 2. Global trends and development of transition economies

2.1. Trends in the development of the national economy in the transition period

2.2 Models of a transition economy as an example foreign countries

Chapter 3. Transition economy in Russia

Conclusion

List of sources used

Introduction

The need to reform the economies of former socialist countries has been brewing for a long time. It was due to the growing inability of the administrative-command economy to ensure sustainable rates of economic development from year to year. The situation became more complicated as extensive and ongoing attempts to use intensive growth factors were exhausted.

The ineffectiveness of the functioning of the administrative-command system is due to at least, two essential prerequisites.

Firstly, the inflexibility and inability of this system to quickly adapt to economic changes.

The formal existence of commodity-money relations undermined healthy competition among producers, and centralized, directive planning suppressed economic initiative.

Secondly, a command economy is characterized by low labor productivity.

The planned nature of economic management, which showed its positive features in the early years Soviet power, later, as the economy became more complex, it began to falter and ultimately proved unable to effectively implement the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution.

As a result, countries with planned economies fell sharply behind countries with developed market economies in technical and technological terms. All this determined the need to reform the administrative-command economy and transform it into a market economy.

The formation of a modern market economy is a rather complicated matter, since it is necessary to radically transform the administrative-command system that has developed over decades.

The market system operates on fundamentally different mechanisms of economic development than the administrative-command system, so it is impossible to form it in a short time.

It is impossible to quickly change the existing socio-economic structure of society and transform property relations, create a market structure and the corresponding regulatory framework, and finally form a new worldview among business entities.

Consequently, the transition from one socio-economic system to another is a very complex process of reform, transformation and development.

On the one hand, this is a process of gradual “undermining” of the fundamental socio-economic relations of the previous system and the emergence and development in its depths of new ones, contradictoryly connecting with the first.

On the other hand, the economy will gradually develop and strengthen the relations and elements of a modern market economy and weaken the relations and elements of the administrative-command system.

Thus, the process of becoming a modern market economy requires a fairly long period of time, during which the so-called transition economic system or transition economy will exist, which is a kind of mixture of relations and elements of administrative-command and modern market systems.

A transition economy characterizes a kind of “intermediate” state of society, when the previous system of socio-economic relations and institutions is destroyed and reformed, and a new one is just being formed.

The changes taking place in a transition economy are predominantly changes in development, rather than in functioning, as is typical for the existing system.

Target course work– analyze the features and specifics of the functioning of a transition economy.

Coursework objectives:

 determine the essence, main features and features of the functioning of a transition economy.

 consider models of transition economies using the example of foreign countries;

 study the historical stages of the transition to market relations;

 identify problems and solutions to the transition economy.

 consider the transition economy of Russia.

The topic I have chosen is quite relevant. Having analyzed the literature on this topic, we can confidently say that there is enough material on both theoretical and practical aspects, i.e. with consideration of the development of individual states. There is a lot of data and statistical nature.

Chapter 1., functions and goals of development of the national economy in the transition period

1.1 The concept of a transition economy and its main features:

A transition economy is a special state of an economic system when it operates during the period of transition of society from one established historical system to another.

The transition period is a period of time during which society carries out fundamental economic, political and social transformations, and the country's economy moves into a new, qualitatively different state in connection with fundamental reforms of the economic system.

This transition for post-socialist countries has one chosen direction - a socially oriented market economy. A transition economy is characterized by the following main features that distinguish it from other established systems.

Firstly, it represents an intersystem formation. Therefore, the essence of a transition economy is a mixture, a combination of administrative-command and modern market systems with their often contradictory functioning elements.

Secondly, if command and market economies are characterized by a certain integrity and sustainable development, then a transition economy is characterized by instability of the state, a violation of integrity.

This situation, which is a crisis for the existing economic system, can be considered normal for a transforming economy. The preservation and reproduction of instability and disequilibrium of the system for a relatively long time has its own reason: a change in the goal.

If in an ordinary, stable system such a goal is its self-preservation, then for a transition economy it is transformation into another system.

Thirdly, a transition economy is characterized by quantitative and qualitative changes in the composition of elements. It “inherited” the structural elements of the previous system: state enterprises, collective farms, production cooperatives, households and the state.

But these elements function in a qualitatively different, transforming economic system, and therefore change both their content and their “functions associated with the emergence of a market economy.

At the same time, new elements that are not characteristic of the old system appear in a transition economy: business structures of various forms of ownership, non-state enterprises, exchanges, commercial banks, non-state pension, insurance and other funds, farms.

Fourthly, in a transition economy there is a qualitative change in systemic connections and relationships. The old planning and directive ties between economic entities disintegrated and disappeared, clearing space for the formation of new market ties.

However, the latter are still of a “transitional” unstable nature and appear in such a deformed form as “barter” payments between enterprises; mutual non-payments between business entities are characterized by frequent failures and crisis manifestations.

– private capitalist,

– state-capitalist,

– small-scale

– patriarchal.

– socialist.

However, its goals and direction of transformation processes were directly opposite to the modern transition economy.

Then the main task was the transition from a multi-structure economy to a single-structure - socialist one.

Now the task is exactly the opposite - to replace the single-structure economy of state socialism with a multi-structure national economy, which serves as the basis of a modern market economy.

The main thing in a transition economy is the creation of market relations, the reform of economic policies and business methods, the transformation of socio-economic relations in the direction of democratization and liberalization.

The goal of the ongoing reforms in the CIS countries, as noted, is a socially oriented model of a market economy. It differs from other models in that it is based on a wide pluralism of forms of ownership, with the public sector occupying a significant place in the economy.

The main difficulty of the transition period is the creation of market economy institutions.

Institutions in a broad sense represent the rules of economic behavior and the mechanisms that ensure their implementation, as well as economic organizations and business entities.

During the transition period, institutions are formed without which a market economy cannot function normally: private property, economic freedom and responsibility of business entities, competition, market infrastructure, etc.

A characteristic feature of a transition economy is institutional incompleteness, the absence or embryonic state of individual market institutions. In most CIS countries, this is, first of all, the lack of a land market, the poor development of the stock market and the entire market infrastructure as a whole.

Significantly slowing down market transformations is the ineffectiveness of the laws of insolvency and bankruptcy of enterprises. The objective reasons for this are deep economic crisis, characteristic of the first stage of market transformations. It caused massive financial insolvency and mutual non-payments of enterprises.

Enforcement of the bankruptcy law in such conditions, without taking into account objective reasons, will lead to the closure of most enterprises and cause mass unemployment.

A distinctive feature of a transition economy is the scale and depth of ongoing transformations. They seize the foundations of the existing system; property relations, political and legal systems of society, social consciousness.

Thus, the transition to a market economy requires profound changes in the institutional structure of society, institutional transformation: the transformation of property relations (privatization) and the introduction of the institution of private property, liberalization of the economy, the creation of a package of market laws and limiting the role of the state, the formation of new business entities (commercial banks, various exchanges, investment and pension funds, etc.).

An essential feature of a transition economy is the socio-economic crisis. Emerging as a result of the collapse of the command-administrative system, this crisis is characterized by a massive drop in production volumes, a decline in the living standards of the population, bankruptcy of enterprises, and increasing unemployment.

It was facilitated by such factors as the deformation of the structure of the national economy (primarily the predominance of the production of means of production over the production of consumer goods), the massive depreciation of fixed assets that coincided with the transformation of the economy, and the catastrophically slow implementation of scientific and technical progress achievements in production.

1.2 Patterns of functioning of a transition economy

In a transition economy of any type, a reproduction process is necessarily carried out. Its general features in comparison with “reproduction” in a pure system could be called specific patterns of functioning of a transition economy. These include the inertia of reproduction and the intensive preferential development of new forms and relationships.

The inertia of reproduction is associated with the continuity of the reproductive process, which excludes development according to the principle of the initial “destruction to the ground” of everything old, and then the creation of everything new on this basis.

This continuity also predetermines the impossibility of quickly replacing existing forms with other, desirable ones. Such actions inevitably bring chaos to the production process, deform it, and lead to a decline in production.

The inertia of reproduction in this sense presupposes the preservation in a transition economy – and for a sufficiently long period – of old economic forms.

The inertia of the reproduction process gives rise to a number of consequences that are important to keep in mind in economic policy.

Firstly, it determines the deep continuity of the transition economy with the initial state of transition. Secondly, it determines the relatively long time frame for the transition economy. Thirdly, inertia enhances the preservation of the social mentality that developed in the past.