Problems of Ensuring Russia's Economic Security during the Economic Crisis. Scientific work: Economic security of the Russian Federation

Noah life.

Frivolity and attempts to minimize the threatening dangers are unacceptable here. The role of science in developing the concept of economic security is very important and responsible. Moreover, it is not just about verbal exercises and not about the search for beautiful formulas, various kinds of classifications of dangers - external and internal, long-term and current. It is fundamentally important to uncover the very essence of the problem, identify real threats, and offer reliable and effective methods to counter them.

As world experience shows, ensuring economic security is a guarantee of a country's independence, the conditions for stability and efficiency of society's life, and the achievement of success. Therefore, ensuring economic security is one of the most important national priorities.

The central direction of world development in the 21st century is globalization. The three main vectors that influenced the development of the world are geopolitics, geoeconomics and geostrategy. Until the second half of the 20th century, geopolitics was in the first place. Geopolitics influenced the change in the geographical boundaries of states, to achieve their goals, states used military methods of influence, seizing the territories they needed by force. The main players in geopolitics are various states, military blocs of allied states pursuing similar goals. Some are still trying to solve their problems with the help of military force (Iraq's invasion of Kuwait), but geo-economics comes to the fore, providing an opportunity for world restructuring, devoid of open confrontation, by geo-economic (non-military) methods. This is primarily due to the increased role of transnational corporations. Today, they, and not individual states, are fighting for the world's resources.

Internationalization fundamentally changes the nature of the international division of labor. Today, exchange processes are taking place not only between states, but, above all, between transnational structures, world reproduction centers (or cores), and large technological megacities. The links of these centers are economic structures and management systems related to different national economies.

"Joints" of interaction between centers are nothing but economic boundaries, which may not coincide with national ones. According to their configuration, world production centers are mobile, the corresponding economic boundaries are of a changing nature, and it is along these boundaries that the world is constantly being redistributed.

Within the framework of world international structures, world income is formed and redistributed. Implementation economic interests takes place not only on the world market, but also on the so-called economic atlas of the world, including the national geo-economic atlas.

Operating on the geo-economic atlas does not require wait-and-see (or opportunistic) trade tactics, but an offensive, active position and appropriate mechanisms for realizing one's interests. Accordingly, the vector strategy sets the strategic model of foreign economic relations, purposefully influencing the formation of the geo-economic situation.

The national economy is capable of reproducing geo-economically efficiently with the transformation of its foreign economic sector from a trade and intermediary to a production and investment model of foreign economic relations. To do this, the state must clearly define its strategic interests, and, depending on them, build relationships with large transnational structures.

If the state adopts the geo-economic vector of development, then new (non-military) types of influence on competitors appear, such as economic, environmental, demographic, etc.

Russian President Putin Vladimir Vladimirovich, in his annual address to the nation, said directly that Russia has two possible ways of development - either Russia will be a strong state, or this state will disappear from the atlas of the world, at least in the form in which it exists today. Many foreigners need Russia as a raw materials appendage to their economy, living off the sale of their resources. This is a disastrous path for Russia. In order to survive, the state needs to build its economic policy taking into account the requirements of the technogenic development of the world community in the 21st century, it is necessary to find our growth points in the form of new technologies, in which we must not catch up, but outstrip foreign competitors.

The concept of the country's economic security includes not only maintaining the socio-political and military stability of the state at a sufficient level, but, above all, the development of the economy with its inclusion in the globalization processes taking place today in the world community. This paper discusses some issues of the country's economic security, as well as the author's opinion on the direction of development Russian economy in order to repel threats to Russia's economic security.

1. ESSENCE AND CRITERIA OF ECONOMIC SECURITY.

In the 1970s, the term "economic security" first appeared. It quickly became widespread in the developed capitalist countries. It was then, while defending a realistic assessment of the current international situation, that representatives of, above all, countries Western Europe advocated the use economic methods ensure national security. One of the main tasks of economic security is the preservation and strengthening of the country's position in the world economic system.

At present, economic security is a nationwide set of measures aimed at sustainable continuous development and improvement of the country's economy, which necessarily implies socio-political stability and independence of the state, as well as a mechanism to counter external and internal threats.

Implementation Issues State strategy economic security Russian Federation, ensuring the protection of national interests in the most important areas of the economy are becoming increasingly important, attracting the close attention of politicians, scientists, and the widest sections of the population. The urgency of these problems is caused by the scale of the threats, and the real damage inflicted on the economic security of the country as a result of the unprecedented economic crisis, which in its depth and duration far exceeded the Great Depression in the USA of 1929-1933.

Because in developed countries market economy(primarily in the United States) has accumulated quite a lot of positive experience in the field of national economic security, it is now undoubtedly of interest.

After the end of the Cold War, ensuring economic security became a priority in US policy.

Secretary of State W. Christopher has repeatedly stated this officially. Thus, in February 1993, he stressed that US foreign policy should be based on "three pillars": strengthening the country's economic security, maintaining democracy, and observing human rights. Key Points in ensuring economic security are, according to the secretary, increasing the competitiveness of American goods in the domestic and foreign markets, reducing the country's dependence on foreign loans and strengthening its ability to fulfill international obligations in trade, economic and other areas.

The concept of national security is broader than the concept of the country's economic security, it includes defense, environmental, energy security, etc.

Row general conditions and factors puts forward the concept of economic security in a number of concepts that form a systematic view of the modern life of society and the state:

Differences in national interests, the desire for a more complete isolation of them from common interests, despite the development of integration processes - the development of an appropriate strategy is required.

The limited nature of natural resources, the varying degree of provision of individual countries with them, contains a potential opportunity for intensifying the economic and political struggle for the use of these resources.

The importance of the competition factor in the production and sale of goods, especially in the field of financial and banking services, is growing. The ability to create conditions for the development of the financial and banking sector and to debug its precise work are put on a par with the ability to create new industrial and agricultural technologies.

That is why the increase in the competitiveness of some countries is seen by others as a real danger, a threat to their national interests.

Economic security itself has a complex internal structure, in which three of its most important elements can be distinguished:

economic independence. Economic independence is not absolute because the international division of labor makes national economies interdependent on each other. Under these conditions, economic independence means the ability to control national resources. It is necessary to reach a level of production, efficiency and quality of products that ensures its competitiveness and allows it to participate on an equal footing in world trade, cooperation ties and the exchange of scientific and technological achievements.

The increased attention to the problem of Russia's economic security is based on objective processes and phenomena taking place in the national economy and in Russian society, as well as in the global economy and international economic relations. It seems appropriate to include the following among the most important such processes and phenomena.

First, the economic experiment of the 1990s in Russia had as its main goal the redistribution of ownership and control over national natural resources and material base social production. In general, it is quite clear that in order to quickly achieve this goal, the only effective means in the course of privatization was the destruction of state system management, since it was the state that was the main holder of ownership of the conditions and means of production.

All this led to the fact that economic reforms were predominantly destructive rather than constructive. Russia has set a kind of record for the duration and depth of the economic downturn in peacetime. By the beginning of the new century, the socio-economic problems of Russia had become so acute that changing domestic and foreign economic policy became not a matter of discussion between economists and political scientists, but a matter of preserving the Russian state on the economic and political map peace. As is known, the leadership of China, for example, has chosen the goals of achieving economic growth due to the predominant development of the production of durable goods. Naturally, this was accompanied by a structural redistribution of property to the extent that it met the main goals of development without destruction. national system management.

National interests, issues of economic security of the state have been and remain decisive in the complex of reforms carried out in China. As a result, the People's Republic of China has demonstrated record rates of economic growth, has become one of the driving forces and a stabilizing factor in the world economy. All countries of the world, almost without exception, were literally "inundated" with Chinese goods, and the Chinese diaspora abroad took a strong position in local business circles not only in developing countries, but also in industrialized countries. Unlike many, it was this country that withstood the unfolding in 1997-1998. world financial crisis.

Secondly, as a result of the change in the leadership of Russia at the turn of the century, the problem of the economic security of the state from a declarative and opportunistic one began to gradually turn into a question of the practical economic policy of the state. This served as an impetus for new research and the development of practical approaches to ensuring national security in various fields, including the security of financial and economic activities.

Thirdly, the process of the beginning of relative financial and economic stabilization in Russia, observed at the present time, seems to reflect the completion of some transitional stage of deregulation of the national economy. To a certain extent, the main division of state property has already taken place, and entrepreneurship is becoming more interested in maintaining the current situation, in stabilizing and consolidating what has been achieved. New radical changes and social upheavals no longer meet the interests of entrepreneurship, because they can disrupt the normal production process, worsen the sale of products and services, and, most importantly, they can threaten a new radical redistribution of property.

In the current situation, Russian entrepreneurs themselves are increasingly becoming interested in securing their position in a regulated market, while improving the legal framework for entrepreneurship, protecting the individual, property rights in other words, in the implementation by the state of its fundamental tasks of ensuring the economic security of financial and economic activities.

Fourth, there was a clear disappointment with the results of the reforms among economists and political scientists from among the "reformers" who stood at the origins of the start of economic reforms. Thus, not only the majority of the population, which remained “outboard” of market reforms, but also a significant part of the Russian scientific elite began to critically evaluate the results of the economic experiment conducted in the country. The demand for economic and political "radical liberalism" was extremely high at the stage of the destruction of the existing system government controlled and implementation of privatization. However, as with other social upheavals that occurred in history, the ideologists of radical reforms turned out to be superfluous after the completion of the redistribution of national wealth. Under these conditions, critical reflection on the ongoing reforms intensified in the Russian economic literature, and more and more attention began to be paid to the role of the state in the economy and the problems of ensuring national economic security.

Fifth, the globalization of the world economy and international industrial relations calls into question the preservation of the national-state form of organization of economic systems. For example, Nekipelov A.D., analyzing the process of globalization and financial sector, notes: “... a modern monetary system characterized by the highest degree of internationalization of capital while maintaining the national-state form of organization of monetary and financial systems. Nekipelov A.D. Consequences of globalization in the financial sector. In: Macroeconomic and financial policy in crisis situations: world experience and Russian reality. Russian entrepreneurship, having received direct access to world markets, in many cases faces not just individual competitive companies, but state-monopoly structures, which they are unable to resist alone.

The fact that in the process of globalization the problem of national interests and the economic security of the state is aggravated is evidenced by such trends as the implementation in explicit and hidden forms of state support for national business in world markets; expansion and increase in the number of zones of national interests of the leading countries of the world, primarily the United States; active study of the problems of ensuring the security of national interests by foreign political scientists and economists.

It would be possible to continue listing the objective processes underlying the increased attention to the problem of Russia's economic security in recent years. However, both the trends listed above and the studies conducted by Russian scientists and specialists indicate that the problem itself is not far-fetched, but quite specific.

Ensuring economic security is one of the most important functions of the state, it is a guarantee of the country's independence and a prerequisite for the stability and effective functioning of society. economic security is part of the national security system, along with such key components as ensuring the reliable defense of the country, maintaining social peace in society, protection from environmental disasters, etc. Level score public debt, weakening scientific and technological potential, regional economic disintegration, sharp differentiation in income, leakage financial resources abroad show that ensuring economic security is a very actual problem for modern Ukraine.

The problems of economic security are actualized during the crisis periods of development. For example, the economic crisis of 1923-1933. required the development and implementation of effective measures to strengthen the economic security of the state, the constancy of its economic system and socialization of economic policy. This approach was reflected in President Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" economic policy, which was characterized by support for the monetary and banking system, stimulating private investment, stabilizing prices, controlling inflation and competition. These measures have strengthened the economic and social security of the state, have made it possible to pursue an effective social policy that is adequate to the requirements of the times. Due to the creation of conditions for ensuring the economic security of a person, the provision of state guarantees of social security in the country, it was possible to achieve significant economic results, introduce appropriate institutional changes and legislative initiatives. In 1934, the Federal Committee on Economic Security was established, and in 1935, the Social Security Board, which over time was turned into an administration (Social Security Administration). In the same year, laws on the economic security of the individual were adopted.

During the 70-90s. 20th century economic condition characterized by the circumstances of the "oil shock", the global food and raw materials crisis, the crises of the financial systems of Western countries. During this period, the concepts of international and national security were developed in the field of providing fuel and raw materials and food; the formation of the first structural elements of the supply system for individual Western states and the world as a whole took place; convincingly established the position that the achievement of the economic stability of the state is the most important factor global leadership, the most effective provision of the national interests of the country in general and economic in particular.

The long-term process of finding effective ways to reliably protect national economic interests in the United States has made it possible to create an effective and efficient legal and regulatory framework for economic security. The economic security of the United States as a separate and integral issue is not formulated either in conceptual and strategic documents, or in legislative and regulatory acts. It is considered only as an integral and most important structural component of the national security of the United States in the National Security Strategy and is presented in the form of separate aspects relating to its legislative support. The experience of the United States is most revealing and useful in a situation where the instability of the global economy has increased significantly, and attention has increased to issues of ensuring economic security at the level of national economies.

Currently, there are both theoretical and methodological approaches to assessing the level of economic security of the country. Thus, the indicators of economic security include the most significant parameters that give a general idea of the state of the economic system as a whole, its stability and mobility: GDP growth, level and quality of life of the majority of the population, inflation rates, unemployment rate, structure of the economy, property stratification of the population, criminalization of the economy, the state of the technical base of the economy, R&D spending, competitiveness, import dependence, openness of the economy, internal and external debt of the state.

However, there is no common understanding of what is meant by security in general and economic security in particular.

Fair, according to the author, is the understanding of security as a set of conditions for the existence of the subject, which he mastered (comprehended, assimilated, created) in the process of his self-realization, and which he is thus able to control. Thus, security is not a state of protection of the interests of the subject, security is not at all anyone's state. Security is the conditions for the existence of the subject, controlled by him. Security, in general view, - is a specific set of conditions of activity. Ensuring security, in turn, is the process of creating favorable conditions for activity. Ensuring the security of the subject is the creation of conditions under which his interests would be realized, the goals set by him would be realized, which are based on his values. Such an understanding of security allows us to move away from the currently unpopular threat-based security management approach and move on to managing the potential of the object in question.

There are also approaches to identifying threats to national security based on the current analysis and forecast of the dynamics of the external environment. This approach was presented in determining the main threats to the security of Ukraine at the meeting of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine on November 17, 2010. Thus, three main threats to national security were identified, which can be called current, focused on solving the problems of the country's development during the next year, 2011.

The first threat was the fact that over 20 years of Ukraine's independence, it was not possible to build a state with sufficient financial and economic immunity. With a highly stable investment climate and responsible national business. Therefore, the global financial and economic crisis will continue to determine the agenda of the life of the country, society and every citizen.

As the second threat, the country's rapid loss of competitiveness is identified, which occurs against the backdrop of a low-tech Ukrainian economy, the loss of motives for introducing innovations, against the backdrop of inefficient public administration.

The third threat at the meeting of the National Security and Defense Council was the build-up of socio-political conflict and general civil instability. In particular, it was about the lack of consolidation of the efforts of the authorities and the opposition.

Threats related to development security, the defense capability of the state in the face of terrorist threats, radicalization of separatism, extremism, information wars and the emergence of new types of weapons in cyberspace were also considered.

Thus, three spheres of society's life activity have been identified: financial, economic and socio-political, crisis phenomena in which are quite probable. From this list, financial and economic threats are the subject of study of the economic security of the country. In addition, in the proposed list of threats, there is a clear transition from management based on the assessment of threats as environmental impact factors to management of the facility's potential. After all, both "financial and economic immunity" and the competitiveness of the country's economy are an assessment of its potential, and not the factors of external influence. Therefore, this approach is a statement of fact: with the existing trends in the development of the external environment, the potential of the object is insufficient. Consequently, the increase in instability in the development of the global economy requires an adequate increase in the economic potential of the national economic system, which will be a set of measures to ensure the economic security of the country.

Literature Pokotilenko R.V. Dissertation on the health of the scientific level of the candidate of economic sciences: The mechanism of formation and security of economic security, Specialty 08.02.03 - Organization of management, planning and regulation of the economy, Donetsk. - 2002. Ivashchenko G.V. On the concept of "security" [ Electronic resource] Access mode: http://www.portalus.ru/modules/philosophy. Ukrainska Pravda [Electronic resource] Vlada was named the main threat to Ukraine. – Access mode: http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2010/11/20/5589207.

Course work

On the topic: Problems of economic security of Russia

Introduction

1. The current state of development of economic security problems

1.1 Key trends in economic security issues

1.2. Factor of globalization of national and economic security

2. Applied aspects of economic security

2.1 Methodology for identifying key economic security issues: historical aspect

2.2. Globalization as a threat to the economic sovereignty of the state

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

The study of the problems of Russia's economic security, by right, has now taken a leading place in the work of Russian research and analytical centers. This topic is devoted to a significant number of author's articles, monographs, collective research. In essence, the current socio-economic situation in Russia is such that no matter what kind of research Russian economists undertake in one area or another, they cannot but touch upon the problems of the country's economic security.

Economic security has different structural levels. We are talking about the economic security of the state, society, enterprise, individual. All these levels form a complicated economic system that does not float in a vacuum, but has a solid foundation - the economic space.

The economic space is the basis of the modern economic system, while possessing relative independence. Economic role space, its heterogeneity, fragmentation, and in former times was taken into account when analyzing the conditions for the formation of differential land rent, which was expressed in specific cost values.

Target term paper - Determining the place and role of economic security in the development system modern system management.

We must not forget that space paired with time are fundamental philosophical categories, the nature of which has not yet been thoroughly studied.

1. The current state of development of economic security problems

1.1 Key trends in economic security issues

The increased attention to the problem of Russia's economic security is based on objective processes and phenomena taking place in the national economy and in Russian society, as well as in the global economy and in international economic relations. It seems appropriate to include the following among the most important such processes and phenomena.

First, the economic experiment of the 1990s in Russia had as its main goal the redistribution of property and control over national natural resources and the material base of social production. On the whole, it is quite understandable that in the course of privatization, the only effective means chosen for the rapid achievement of this goal was the destruction of the state management system, since it was the state that was the main holder of ownership of the conditions and means of production.

All this led to the fact that economic reforms were predominantly destructive rather than constructive. Russia has set a kind of record for the duration and depth of the economic downturn in peacetime. By the beginning of the new century, the socio-economic problems of Russia had become so acute that changing domestic and foreign economic policy became not a matter of discussion between economists and political scientists, but a matter of preserving the Russian state on the economic and political map of the world. As is known, the leadership of China, for example, has chosen the goals of achieving economic growth through the predominant development of the production of durable goods as reform priorities. Naturally, this was accompanied by a structural redistribution of property to the extent that it met the main goals of development without destroying the national system of governance.

Secondly, as a result of the change in the leadership of Russia at the turn of the century, the problem of the economic security of the state from a declarative and opportunistic one began to gradually turn into a question of the practical economic policy of the state. This served as an impetus for conducting new research and developing practical approaches to ensuring national security in various areas, including the security of financial and economic activities.

In the current situation, Russian entrepreneurs themselves are increasingly becoming interested in securing their position in a regulated market, while improving the legal framework for entrepreneurship, protecting the individual, property rights, in other words, in the implementation by the state of its fundamental tasks of ensuring the economic security of financial and economic activities.

Fourth, there was a clear disappointment with the results of the reforms among economists and political scientists from among the "reformers" who stood at the origins of the start of economic reforms. Thus, not only the majority of the population, which remained “outboard” of market reforms, but also a significant part of the Russian scientific elite began to critically evaluate the results of the economic experiment conducted in the country. The demand for economic and political "radical liberalism" was extremely high at the stage of the destruction of the existing system of state administration and the implementation of privatization. However, as with other social upheavals that occurred in history, the ideologists of radical reforms turned out to be superfluous after the completion of the redistribution of national wealth. Under these conditions, critical reflection on the ongoing reforms intensified in the Russian economic literature, and more and more attention began to be paid to the role of the state in the economy and the problems of ensuring national economic security.

Fifthly, the globalization of the world economy and international production relations calls into question the preservation of the national-state form of organization of economic systems. Russian entrepreneurship, having received direct access to world markets, in many cases faces not just individual competitive companies, but state-monopoly structures, which they are unable to resist alone.

1.2. Factor of globalization of national and economic security

In the extensive literature on the entire spectrum of issues of state, national and economic security, the factor of globalization has not yet received proper coverage, which is interpreted mainly as the next step in the linear development of the international division of labor. And in modern economic literature there are arguments about the comparative costs and comparative advantages of various options for the division of labor between countries. It is assumed that it is still deployed on the basis of the principle of mutual benefit and interdependence, and not so long ago the last word in the theory of international relations was the concept of interdependence of nations and states in the world economy.

However, the experience of the world, or, as it was called in the literature, the "Asian" crisis of 1997-1998, although this crisis is not regional, but systemic, shows that capital flight organized by large financial speculators, which bankrupted developing countries Asian region, changed the configuration of the world economy, bringing to the surface the destructive role of global financial capital.

There are many examples, but only one can be cited - the more than sad fate of Indonesia, which had a backlog of high-tech industries for the 21st century and could really take its rightful place among developed countries. The instant withdrawal of capital in the form of portfolio investments ruined the country, caused the sharpest social conflicts and even the division of the territory.

Using such examples, one can assess the entire degree of risk for national economies, which is associated with the globalization factor. With this in mind, the country must be prepared to take proactive steps to ensure its economic security.

In this case, it is necessary to correctly determine the vector of such actions. Some experts consider the probable decline in world prices for exported raw materials, as the main source of foreign exchange earnings, to be a special destabilizing factor. However, economic threats to a much greater extent for our country, as well as for many others, currently come from the instability of foreign exchange and financial markets. This is no longer interdependence, but dependence within the system of the world economy, due to its structural imbalance.

The globalization factor has upset the relative balance of the world economy system, the interdependence of its structural elements and components.

The qualitative difference between the global system and the previous traditional model of international economic relations is its structural asymmetry, not only due to the hypertrophy of its financial segment, but also its separation from the system due to the exceptional mobility of portfolio investments.

In this regard, experts point to the threat to the economic security of the country of sudden outbreaks of financial epidemics: “Thus, we are talking about the formation of qualitatively new processes that make the situation less and less manageable by the traditional set of levers. This trend is also enhanced by the peculiarities of the behavior of market operators, whose actions can be provoked by the steps of some large participants (the so-called herd behavior). Hence the threat of the spread of financial epidemics, often based on the subjective mood of the market. It is these circumstances that make many economists and practitioners (P. Krugman, J. Bhagwati, J. Soros and others) talk about the need to limit the mobility of capital, reduce the destabilizing possibilities of "hot" short-term money.

Following the old scheme, it can be assumed that capital mobility constitutes the investment potential for material production that the competitive mechanism of free flow of capital is the basis for the modernization of production. This was the case as long as finance capital was functionally connected with productive capital.

However, for some time now, a different scheme has been operating. Despite the short historical period of its implementation, material has already been accumulated for summing up some results.

Of course, the new situation requires in-depth scientific research leading to successful economic practices that can ensure the economic security of the country at all its structural levels.

2. Applied aspects of economic security

2.1 Methodology for identifying key economic security issues

The relevance, complexity and novelty of the problem of economic security and the security of its financial component in the context of globalization suggests a combination of empirical analysis with the implementation of the scientific potential of methodology and theory.

Deep structural changes in the system of economic relations in our country quite naturally gave a powerful impetus to the development of specific applied work across the entire spectrum of market relations, their structure and infrastructure. Our scientists, specialists, and practitioners had to master both new economic vocabulary and new approaches to real economic processes on the go.

Questions of methodology and theory have been relegated to the background and even further, perhaps because of their dubious "Marxist" origins. Generations of young PhDs in economics understand the intricacies of banking but believe that methodology and technique are one and the same. But if in applied economic research, perhaps, it is possible to confine oneself to methods, then for a qualified determination of the nature of such complex phenomena as economic security, it is necessary to use both method and theory in combination.

As a method in this work, an attempt was made to use the universal principles of a systematic approach.

The issue of economic security is already being actively developed in our country, a solid basis has been created for its further theoretical understanding, a number of definitions have been proposed. But the work done seems to be predominantly analytical. The subject has been studied in parts, and the time has come to move from the particular to the general, i.e. make a synthesis. As a result of the synthesis, the subject under study - economic security - will appear as a whole, and the whole, as follows from the general systems theory, is an interconnected set.

In relation to economic security, this can be represented as an interconnected set of economic relations within a large system organized according to the principle of hierarchy, i.e. subordination of some structural elements of the system to others.

The main property of the system is its integrity. This means that the system is not a simple collection of its elements, their arithmetic sum. Its qualitative certainty depends on the strength of the interaction, its cohesion constituent parts. If individual elements fall out of the system, then it does not decrease, but collapses.

The consequence of the integrity of the system is integrativity. Integrity is the basic law of any system - technological, biological, cultural, military, social, economic. The integrativity of the system in an abstract form is expressed in the irreducibility of the parts of the system to their sum, which is greater than the terms.

In the language of economics, this means that the system, through the interaction of its parts, creates an additional productive force that is greater than productive force its individual parts.

The positive dynamics of the economic system is characterized by natural and monetary, absolute and relative indicators and indicates its economic security.

Economic security is a dynamic integral indicator of the integrity of the economic system.

Economic security belongs to the category of complex economic categories, in this capacity it reflects the interconnections and interdependencies of a large economic system. This system can be characterized with varying degrees of abstraction in accordance with the methodological principle of ascending from the abstract to the concrete. Therefore, the proposed definition, due to its abstractness, expands into a number of other, more specific definitions as a necessary approximation to the modern realities of the Russian economy.

Nevertheless, it is possible to understand the current situation in a constantly reforming economy (although it is high time to stop at least in order to understand what economic system we are in) with minimal costs, using the developments of the theory, thereby making the transition from methodological to conceptual research principles.

However, if science has developed universal principles of a systematic approach as a research method, then modern economic science does not have such universal principles. On the contrary, it breaks up into different schools, directions that offer conflicting concepts that explain the same economic phenomena and processes often from opposite positions.

In recent years, the opinion about the crisis of economic theory as a whole has begun to spread. Both in our country and in the West, economic theory turned out to be untenable in solving the problems of transitional post-socialist economies. For example, the inflation forecast for Russia turned out to be underestimated by tens of thousands of times, privatization did not lead to the emergence of an effective owner. True, claims in this case should be presented to liberal economists. Well-known Western economists of alternative trends - the late V. Leontiev, K. Arrow, J. Tobin and others - were critical of the recommendations of experts close to the International Monetary Fund, for whom the main thing is to remove the state from the economy, while economists close to the institutional direction, they believe that during the period of radical restructuring of the economy, the regulatory role of the state should not be weakened, but strengthened.

Within the scope of this study, it is not possible to dwell on this issue specifically. However, it is also incorrect to leave it aside because of the need to turn to theory.

The reform of the economy of our country was carried out and is being carried out according to the liberal model, and its failures, at least in the West, are explained in the opposite way: supporters of economic liberalism - by the fact that the state continues to interfere in the economy, and their opponents - by the fact that the state has abstained from regulating complex economic processes, which ultimately led to the threat of losing its economic security.

In 2001, a study was published in the United States, carried out under the auspices of the American Independent Peace Research Institute, under the eloquent title "The Tragedy of Russian reforms”, in which the thesis is consistently carried out that the reforms would be effective in the economic and social relations, if carried out differently, democratically, taking into account the interests of the population of the country, its economic security.

liberal model reform was, as already noted, focused on the eradication of state ownership, the creation of the social base of capitalism and has already conceptually created a threat to the economic security of the country, since this model lacked criteria for economic and social efficiency.

It is not by chance that the reality of such a threat turned out to be in the center of attention of politicians, sociologists, economists, and the problem of the economic security of our country came to the first place in importance.

The crisis state of modern economic theory can be regarded as an incentive to develop new approaches based on the knowledge accumulated over many decades. economic knowledge, which cannot be depreciated by the failure of any school or theory.

In this regard, institutional theory has great scientific potential, the fashion for which has led to significant costs and confusion, since it is difficult to understand why, for example, “new institutionalism” and “neo-institutionalism” exist, as it were, independently.

It seems to us that modern economic theory cannot be reduced to institutionalism, no matter how it is interpreted, it must be based on the synthesis of the actual interpretation of the classics, neoclassics and institutionalism. This version of the formation of a general economic theory is close to what Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. Maevsky calls evolutionary theory. He writes: “The paradox of modern post-industrial society lies in the fact that fundamental economic science in countries that have achieved success in the field of technological progress is still in captivity of the so-called orthodoxy, primarily neoclassical theory. The latter does not adequately describe the features of a technologically progressing market economy... The consequence of such a paradox can be considered the fact that something like a Chinese wall has arisen between orthodoxy and modern business in the field of technology.

The author rightly points out the timeliness of the process of formation of modern evolutionary theory, which considers economic development as an irreversible process of increasing complexity, diversity and productivity of production due to periodically recurring changes in technologies, types of products, organizations and institutions (rules of conduct, according to D. North) .

D. North, the Nobel Prize winner, is the most authoritative representative of the version of institutionalism that adequately perceives and scientifically interprets modern economy functioning on the basis of the interaction of market and non-market factors.

This important circumstance is also pointed out by J. Kornai, who made significant clarifications to the principles of systemic research within the framework of the “systemic paradigm”, modernizing it by including both market and non-market institutions in the system.

He offers a fairly broad understanding of the concept of institutions, which "includes the dominant legal structure of the system under consideration, its moral norms and property rights, the distribution of power centers, incentives interacting with the subjects of society, and the information structure" .

The modern economic system is a more complex and more contradictory interaction of its constituent elements and components than the system of the classical market economy of the past. That is why it is advisable to trace the process of historical changes that have taken place, comparing the past with the present, referring to the classical systemic paradigm.

As is known, the classical school of English political economy made a historical transition from fragmented economic knowledge to systemic knowledge. It was the classics who made a breakthrough in theory, presenting the market economy as a large economic system of social division of labor, in which the relationship between production and consumption is mediated by exchange and distribution.

A large economic system is economic relations between people in the process of production, exchange, distribution and consumption, which are self-regulated by the "invisible hand of the market", i.e. competition. A large system is structurally composed of small systems. This means that both production, and exchange, and distribution, and consumption have relative independence, their own structure and logic of development. We emphasize that this independence is relative, i.e. should not go beyond the dependence between small systems in accordance with the principles of hierarchy and integrity.

It is advisable to represent a large economic system through the interconnections of its enlarged blocks - production and circulation. This is a departure from the scheme under consideration, but it allows us to dwell on two interpretations of the nature of the relationship between them, the concept of the primacy of production over circulation and the concept of exchange, which assigns a decisive role to the sphere of circulation.

The classical concept of the primacy of production over circulation was opposed in the past and is opposed in the present by the exchange concept, which considers the sphere of circulation as a system, and production as a subsystem.

Of course, 200 years ago there were other terms in circulation. The question rested on the nature of wealth and the sources of its achievement. Wealth was a central theme and subject of controversy between the mercantilists, on the one hand, and the physiocrats, and then the classics, on the other. The classics, as you know, associated wealth with the production of material goods.

Thus, under industrial capitalism, the growth of profits was ensured by the expansion and modernization of production, led to an increase in labor productivity, with the growth of the wealth of individual capitalists, the wealth of society grew. Capital needed qualified workers, and this expanded the scope of education, capital was interested in the development of science and technology, using their achievements in competition. The system was integrative, its dynamics were positive. On this real basis, the ideology of liberalism was quite organically formed. The emerging new economic system was dynamic, its integrativity is beyond doubt. The connections and interconnections of production, exchange, distribution and consumption were mediated by the market; the contradictions inherent in the relative isolation of each of the small systems were successfully resolved until the first crisis of overproduction, which occurred in 1825 and was considered at first as a temporary failure in the sphere of marketing. But later it turned out that since 1825 the market system entered into a stage of cyclical development that continues to this day.

During a crisis, the system loses its integrative properties, the whole ceases to be greater than the sum of its parts. In terms of organizational science - A. Bogdanov's tectology, ingression is a general form of a chain connection and is equal to organization. Its opposite is disingression or disorganization, the sign of which is “the reduction of the practical sum of activities by the very way they are combined. And it becomes conceivable only in such a form that some part of them becomes resistance to some other part of them. Such a resisting part is consumption limited by solvent needs. Resistance in the sphere of consumption is constantly operating and only gradually reaches a critical mass, which manifests itself through a crisis.

Before the global crisis of 1929-1933. the system coped with crises on its own, and each point of economic recovery exceeded the previous one. The system developed along an ascending line, albeit through periodic recessions, i.e. she was in relative economic security.

However, the global crisis of 1929-1933, which was especially devastating in the United States and rightly called the "Great Depression" there, turned out to be irreversible. It was, in the full meaning of this definition, a crisis in the system of market self-regulation.

The way out of the crisis was not carried out by the "invisible hand of the market", not through the mechanisms of competition, but by the methods of strict state regulation within the framework of the "New Deal" of President Roosevelt. Passed Laws"On the Restoration of National Industry", "On the Regulation of Agriculture", etc. contradicted the US Constitution, but met the needs of US national security, in which economic security was given a central place.

The history of the mixed economy in the USA and Europe begins with Roosevelt's New Deal, where economic policy was formed under the influence of the ideas of John Keynes, outlined by him in his monograph “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money” published in 1936.

Keynesianism was established in the post-war period for three decades. Every government of any developed country put the fight against unemployment at the forefront by increasing the aggregate demand of the population. Without going into the details of his well-reasoned recommendations to increase aggregate demand in order to stimulate investment through various social payments, etc., it can be stated that they were ultimately aimed at intra-system balancing of production and consumption. But this turned out to be necessary methods government intervention into the economy, both direct and indirect, through financial and credit instruments and levers.

The terms belonging to Keynes, such as "built-in stabilizer", "budget multiplier", testify to the introduction of non-market institutions into the system of market relations.

In a certain sense, Keynes' predecessors in this direction were the American institutionalists, who drew attention to the limitations of the neoclassical analysis of human economic behavior, which is supposedly guided only by the relations of supply and demand, while in reality various institutions influence his behavior - the family, trade unions, traditions, education, culture, religion. J. Commons, for example, considered such a market category as value not as a result of the interaction of supply and demand, but as a product of a legal agreement of "collective institutions".

In the 20s of the 20th century, institutionalists justified state intervention in the economy with the aim of curbing the power of monopolies; in the 30s, anti-crisis regulation was considered the main task of the state. In this regard, the structure of a large economic system has become more complex due to the incorporation of non-market institutions, or stabilizers, into its subsystems. Thus, in direct production, the relationship between labor and capital has lost its purely market character due to the legislative establishment of a minimum wages and participation of trade unions in the conclusion of collective agreements between employees and their employers.

In the post-war period governmental support business began to be carried out through tax incentives, method accelerated depreciation, which first began to be used in the USA in 1942. Then other countries began to use it: in 1948, Germany, in 1960 France, in 1962 - Great Britain.

Social payments, including unemployment benefits, should also be included among the built-in stabilizers. Indeed, the taxes that fund unemployment benefits rise sharply when employment is high. That's why reserve fund rises during the boom period and puts pressure on spending too much, curbing inflation. On the contrary, during a period of weak employment, the reserve fund is used to pay income, which increases effective demand, supporting consumption, which leads to a decrease in the rate of decline in production, thereby mitigating the recession.

Other types of benefits - such as charitable payments outside the system social insurance- according to the nature of their automatic anti-cyclical regulation, they also belong to the stabilizing type.

Thus, not only the production segment of the economic system falls out of the space of free competition to the extent that state regulation exists. This applies to exchange, distribution, and consumption.

One of the conditions for Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization is, as is known, the deregulation of agricultural production. However, in the US, Canada and Europe favorable climatic conditions do not prevent subsidizing agriculture in amounts that are incomparable with the costs of this key industry for Russia in terms of its economic security. In the United States, the number of employees in the system of the Department of Agriculture is second only to the Pentagon, but the point is not in the number, but in the variety of the functions that the employees of this ministry perform in regulating such an important industry.

The state in the United States uses a powerful tool to stabilize the economy through a system of purchasing goods and services for its needs in the amount of about 2 trillion. US dollars, i.e. is a permanent participant in the exchange relationship. The given data do not give a complete picture of the institutional features of the modern economic system, but may serve to expose the myth about the advantages of a free competitive economy. market system which has not been found in nature for a long time.

The inclusion of non-market institutions in the economic system is caused by the objective need to ensure its economic security and was achieved by maintaining the integrity of the system, greater or lesser consistency of its structural elements and components. Periodically arising after the crisis of the 30s. of the last century, recessions were not threatening to economic security, with the exception of the global crises of 1974-75. and the crisis that began in 2001 and is currently ongoing, which in many ways is of a systemic nature.

It can be argued that the crisis of the early 70s. of the last century was the prologue of the modern crisis.

In the early 70s of the last century, two events occurred that left their mark on all subsequent years. This is the collapse of the gold standard as a result of the US refusal to exchange paper dollars for gold to IMF member states.

Masses of paper dollars were issued on euro markets, then eurobonds were issued, the issue of which was not taxed, euro-commercial bills appeared with the condition of payment in eurocurrency, and so on. This was the first impetus to the isolated position of the sphere of circulation in the economic system, which quickly acquired a supranational character.

Another important event in the early 1970s was the organization of the international cartel of oil producers and exporters OPEC and its decision to multiply oil prices.

Both of these factors influenced the nature of the next cyclical crisis, which was characterized by a combination of high unemployment and high inflation, which formally contradicted the Keynesian model of combining low unemployment with metered inflation.

The classical cycle in the phase of depression is characterized by a decrease in prices and, on this basis, the dissipation of commodity surpluses, the crisis in 1974-1975. was not classical in this regard, prices were kept high not only because of oil prices, but also because of the excess money in circulation associated with the collapse of the gold standard.

The current situation's accusations against Keynesian counter-cyclical regulation were, to say the least, not correct. Keynes recommended paper issuance as the government's monetary reserve, which should be used for investment in production during a recession, but with the condition that investment should go to the real sector of the economy, and not to speculative transactions in the markets.

The ambiguity of the course towards deregulation and liberalization of economic relations has another aspect - the discrepancy between the ideology of economic liberalism and the actual practice of state regulation in all economically developed countries with a "market economy".

The course towards deregulation within the framework of Reaganomics or Thatcherism was resolutely declared, but implemented with great caution. In practice, Keynesian methods of influencing the economic cycle were preserved, for example, the well-known practice of regulating the rate loan interest central bank USA - the Fed, its increase during a period of high conjuncture and decrease during a recession.

Important areas of key importance for the economic security of the country remained under state protection and control, for example, Agriculture and energy, not to mention the military, space programs.

Only in 1996 did the California legislature decide to abolish state control over the power supply system within its jurisdiction.

It was assumed that energy producers freed from state control would enter into noble competition for the consumer, earn market mechanisms and prices will start to fall, as it is written in the textbooks "Economics". According to A.Marshall's pricing model, the surplus profit, which he called "quasi-rent", which is formed as a result of price growth due to the excess of demand over supply, should be invested for growth production capacity As a result, supply will increase and prices will decrease.

However, in reality, it turned out that the construction of powerful power plants requires billions of dollars of investment, i.e. long money, while the shortage of electricity during peak hours allows it to be sold at a price 8-10 times higher than the cost of its production. California has experienced rolling blackouts that have left a strong impression on other states that are slow to take advantage of the free market economy of the California model.

Investment in the real sector of the economy becomes unattractive in comparison with the fantastic profitability of stock speculation and the possibility of relocating enterprises to countries with low labor costs. This practice is associated with the activities of transnational corporations (TNCs), which explode national economic systems and do not fit into the traditional economic theory international division of labor. New world economy, which began to be designated as global, has not received a worthy theoretical interpretation. It, of course, is not in the system of A. Smith, nor in the system of K. Marx, nor in the system of J. Keynes, who considered international processes as national processes that went beyond their borders, and did not attach to them the special significance that they acquired currently.

2.2. Globalization as a threat to the economic sovereignty of the state

Indeed, in the past, the external economy did not break away from its national soil, international economic relations were of an interstate nature and guaranteed the inviolability of sovereignty and economic security, and the principle of mutual benefit acted in international exchange.

Globalization poses a threat to the sovereignty of the state and its national security, if considered in the aspect of the activities of TNCs, for which the territory of the earth is equal to the economic space for the free movement of their goods and capital.

It is known that the basis of the economic global system is about 500 TNCs, five of them control more than half of the world production of durable goods, as well as aircraft, electronic equipment of cars, etc.

Supporting the ideology of economic liberalism, advocating the free movement of capital, goods, services within the global economic space, TNCs themselves use planning, set prices not as a result of the struggle between supply and demand, but by administrative means. But the most important thing is that in the 90s of the last century there was a transformation of transnational capital into financial capital with its separation from real capital.

At the system level, this means a gap between the sphere of production and the sphere of circulation, an imbalance in the relationship between production, exchange, distribution and consumption. And this is no longer abstract reasoning, but an objective reality expressed in numbers. So, if in 1990 600 billion US dollars were sent to money speculation every day, then in 1997 - more than 1 trillion. US dollars, which is 29-30 times higher than the cost of goods and services sold per day.

The separation of finance from the real economy is a historical reality of the late twentieth century.

With the increasing power of computers on the market valuable papers began to dominate secondary securities, combined general concept"derivatives". These are futures, swaps, options, etc. Not so long ago, these securities were a kind of insurance for the real economy. But then, with the development electronic market, derivatives trading has become completely autonomous. In the middle of the 90s of the XX century. The commercial director of Deutsche Bank, T.Fischer, defined the current situation as follows: "the financial world has emancipated itself from the real sphere."

Such emancipation was expressed in astronomical sums: at the end of the 20th century. the total volume of the secondary securities market was approaching 100 trillion. US dollars, and the annual turnover of financial transactions reached half a quadrillion US dollars.

An economist who has not accepted the postulates of modern monetarism must ask himself how it is possible to achieve such fantastic amounts, which is the source of enrichment for financial speculators, were the old mercantilists who believed that trade was the source of wealth really right? The answer can be unequivocal: the superprofits of financial speculators are the result of the redistribution of material wealth on a global scale. This is made possible by the liberalization of national economies, which deprives the state of the possibility of hard financial control, regulation foreign exchange market, conservation of national wealth.

The new economic system formed as a result of globalization contains a destructive gene that gives rise to and multiplies the value of the asymmetry factor - hypertrophy stock market, which feeds on dimensionless credit resources.

The well-known historian, ethnologist L. Gumilyov called space and time the parameters of the history of ethnic groups. He gave space an essentially economic definition, calling it "enclosing and feeding landscape." He interpreted time in an extraordinary way, emphasizing the conventionality of both linear and cyclic time.

But time, like space, has an economic content, for example, an indicator of hourly labor productivity, the cyclical nature of a market economy, depreciation periods, etc. At the same time, these indicators may be included in the integrative indicator of the security of the economic system. It should be clarified that logically, at the level of theory, we can talk about a single integrative indicator of economic security, its positive dynamics. However, economic security is made up of many factors - military, political, economic, social, demographic. Of particular importance in modern conditions are energy and food security, which are directly related to the economic space. And this is nothing new. As we have seen, the economic aspect of space was taken into account earlier both in theory and in practice, however, economic space was not an independent object of scientific research and was not considered as economic category as it is currently happening.

There are quite serious grounds for bringing the problem of the security of the economic space to the fore.

Of course, this is directly related to globalization, which has already been discussed. However, attention to the negative manifestations of globalization, which constitute a threat to economic security not only for Russia, but also for the world economy, should not distract from the objective processes underlying the globalization of the world space.

The economic space coincides with the territory in a natural closed economy, existing on the principles of self-sufficiency, or autarky.

In a market economy, the economic space is determined by the scale of production and the geography of the sale of its product. Its conquest is carried out on the basis of specialization and cooperation. This is the material basis for the activities of TNCs, for which the territory of the earth is an economic space without national borders, in which capital, goods, and services move freely. Modern communications and, potentially, the "Internet" make the economic space single and non-national.

The economic space has turned into an aggressive economic, competitive environment, which is still open to new competitors. Therefore, Russia should make every possible use of its intellectual potential, Natural resources, part of the surviving production base to adequately support its national producers and potential exporters.

With the support of state protectionism, soft, hidden, as is done in countries with a developed market economy, domestic entrepreneurs, through the inevitable processes of mergers and acquisitions, can move on to conquer economic space, or, more precisely, to win it back. It would not be superfluous to recall that the Westerner and marketer S. Witte insisted on pursuing an active protectionist policy towards young Russian capital.

In the Soviet system, the state played the main role in ensuring economic security at all its structural levels. In addition to a powerful apparatus of political control, which is condemned by the public, the state had an equally powerful economic base.

However, without delving into the still not fully clarified question of the comparative advantages or disadvantages of various models of control, we note something in common: the role of the state in the economy is proportional to the resources it manages, be it the budget, natural resources, property rights.

Russian state continues to be freed from such a burden as industrial enterprises, land, reduces taxes and thereby loses the opportunity to have a significant impact on economic processes, not to mention economic security and its one of the main threats - the flight of capital from the country. This sensitive issue is not properly discussed, although it is the reason for the scarcity of the state budget.

In yielding the economic space to business, the state should not shirk its inherent modern functions - political, economic, social. State regulation of economic processes should be aimed at restoring optimal proportions between production, exchange, distribution and consumption. This goal can be served by institutions of property rights, contract law, competitive order, etc., the activation of which can reduce the uncertainty factor, reduce risks and threats to economic security and business and the state.

Conclusion

Summing up some results, we can state that the economic security of Russia is closely related to the structure and dynamics of the world economy, which is in a state of potential systemic crisis. Our country can protect its economy from the risks of globalization by reducing its dependence on accidents and sudden fluctuations in the world market.

The scientific achievements of the theory of catastrophes, the subject of which is the study and prevention of risks, conflicts and crises, can become a response to the needs of ensuring economic security.

The need to turn to the theory of catastrophes for many became obvious already at the beginning of "perestroika" and the answer to it was the publication of the monograph "Theory of Catastrophes" by Academician V. Arnold, in which guidelines were formulated for responding to the difficulties and likely undesirable consequences of reforms.

The main thing is to realize the non-linearity transients, to which managers accustomed to linear thinking need to adapt.

This can be understood as a call for prompt and non-standard solutions and actions to prevent a crisis in the economic security of the country, primarily from the state, but not only from the state, but also from institutions - norms, mechanisms, rules of conduct.

List of used literature

1. Abalkin L.I. Economic security of Russia: threats and their reflection // Questions of Economics. - 1994. - No. 12

2. Arnold V. Catastrophe theory. - M., 1990.

3. Bogdanov A.A. Tectology. General organizational science, book 1. - M., 1989. - S. 161.

4. Bogdanov I.A. Economic security of Russia: theory and practice. - M.: ISPIRAN, 2005. - S. 28

5. Gumelev A.A. From Russia to Russia. - M., 1992; Osipov Yu.M. Russia in actual time-space // Philosophy of economy. - 2004. - No. 5.

6. Ershov M. Russia and the levers of globalization policy // ME and MO. - 2003. - No. 5. - P. 3.

7. Zagashvili V.S. Economic security of Russia. - M.: Gardarika, 2004. - S. 114

8. Illarionov A.I. Criteria of economic security // Questions of Economics. - 2004. - No. 10

9. Martin G.P., Schumann H. The Trap of Globalization: An Attack on Prosperity and Democracy. - M.: Publishing house "ALPINA", 2001. - S. 82.

10. Movsesyan A., Ognivtsev S. Transnational capital and national states // ME and MO. - 2004. - No. 6. - S. 56-57.

11. Nekipelov A.D. Consequences of globalization in the financial sector. In: Macroeconomic and financial policy in crisis situations: world experience and Russian reality. Materials of the situational analysis. - M.: IMEPI RAN "EPIKON", 2004. - S. 77.

12. Ortting R. RAO UES of California. - N.G. 01/20/2001.

13. Pankov V. Economic security // Interlink. - 2002. - No. 3

14. Plisetsky A. Economic security: monetary and financial aspects // ME and MO. - 2005. - No. 5.

15. Plisetsky D. Economic security: monetary and financial aspects // ME and MO. - 2004. - No. 5. - S. 28.

16. Puzanov V.I. Intellectual potentials of the USA and Russia: on the way to competition of minds // USA and Canada. - 2003. - No. 12.

17. Philosophical encyclopedia. - M., 1970. - T. 5; Bogdanov A.A. Tectology. General organizational science. - M., 1989.

18. Chekmarev V.V. To the theory of economic space // Proceedings of the St. Petersburg University of Economics and Finance. - 2005. - No. 3.

19. Economic security: Production - Finance - Banks / Under. ed. VC. Senchagov. - M.: Finstatinform, 2004

20. Reddaway P. & Glinsky D. The tragedy of Russia's Reforms. Market Bolshevism Against Democracy. - Wash.: United States Institutes of Peace, 2001.

See: Illarionov A.I. Criteria of economic security // Questions of Economics. - 2004. - No. 10; Economic security: Production - Finance - Banks / Under. ed. VC. Senchagov. - M.: Finstatinform, 2004; Bogdanov I.A. Economic security of Russia: theory and practice. - M.: ISPIRAN, 2005. - S. 28; Abalkin L.I. Economic security of Russia: threats and their reflection // Questions of Economics. - 1994. - No. 12; Pankov V. Economic security // Interlink. - 2002. - No. 3; Zagashvili V.S. Economic security of Russia. - M.: Gardarika, 2004. - S. 114; Plisetsky A. Economic security: monetary and financial aspects // ME and MO. - 2005. - No. 5.

For example, Nekipelov A.D., analyzing the process of globalization in the financial sector, notes: “... a modern monetary and financial system has developed, characterized by the highest degree of internationalization of capital while maintaining the national-state form of organization of monetary and financial systems.” Nekipelov A.D. Consequences of globalization in the financial sector. In: Macroeconomic and financial policy in crisis situations: world experience and Russian reality. Materials of the situational analysis. - M.: IMEPI RAN "EPIKON", 2004. - S. 77.

See: Plisetsky D. Economic security: monetary and financial aspects // ME and MO. - 2004. - No. 5. - S. 28.

See: Ershov M. Russia and the levers of globalization policy // ME and MO. - 2003. - No. 5. - P. 3.

See: Philosophical Encyclopedia. - M., 1970. - T. 5; Bogdanov A.A. Tectology. General organizational science. - M., 1989.

See: Chekmarev V.V. To the theory of economic space // Proceedings of the St. Petersburg University of Economics and Finance. - 2005. - No. 3.

See: Arnold V. Catastrophe theory. - M., 1990.

See: Puzanov V.I. Intellectual potentials of the USA and Russia: on the way to competition of minds // USA and Canada. - 2003. - No. 12.

We can agree with the assessments of the well-known American economist Turow that "today Russia is halfway between a market economy and a planned economy, and neither of them works."

The economic result of the reform is a drop in Russia's share in world GDP to 2.4% and a transition from 3rd place, which was occupied by Russia in the USSR (after the USA and Japan and shared it with Germany) to 15th. Up to 1.3%, i.e. almost halved specific gravity Russia and in world exports compared to the pre-perestroika period.

As a result, the share of Russian products in the world markets for science-intensive civilian products is 1%. For comparison: the US accounts for 36%, Japan - 30% of these markets. Especially dangerous is the lag in such industries as computer science, electronics, communications, which has developed in the past decades, including because of the existing gap between the civilian and military-industrial sectors of the economy.

Many Western experts explain the general economic weakening of Russia by inefficiency economic reforms and the over-opening of the economy to foreign competition. Others emphasize that it is not "liberalism, but the economy of plunder that has been established in the country" that is to blame. The assessments of French economists are distinguished by a particularly critical approach. Professor Brandet (Paris University Dauphine) writes: “Everything that could be sold was sold in Russia, and as a result, in the absence of funds for investment, huge amounts of money ended up in individual accounts of Swiss and Cypriot banks. The industrial potential of the country was practically destroyed, and the volume industrial production decreased by 10% per year.

The Russian economy currently remains largely reformed, transitional, and has not completed its transformation into any particular state. It combines elements of the old and new systems. If in terms of the share of non-state economic entities the Russian economy can be considered a fully market economy, then in terms of the efficiency of their activities and the level of competitiveness, it is not. In addition, more than half of Russian firms are generally fictitious and are often associated with illegal activities.

In Russia, an inefficient structure of social production is preserved - the predominance of fuel and energy and raw materials industries and a low share of engineering products and modern high-tech, science-intensive industries. Weak is the financial and credit in general and the banking system, in particular, which limits the investment of production. Internal parameters largely determine external ones: Russia remains a supplier of raw materials and an importer on world markets finished products, including various types of modern technology and food.

Russia's participation in international economic relations is still insignificant. Russia's share in the world population is 2.5%, in world natural resources - 30%, in world exports - 1.74% (moreover, in world exports of high-tech goods - 0.7%), in world imports - 0.73%. Consequently, Russia is weakly involved in global processes, which is connected both with the legacy of the past and with the weaknesses of its present position.

At the same time, the importance of the world market for the Russian economy is enormous. So, in 2002, exports amounted to 133.7 billion dollars, and imports - 57.4 billion dollars.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that in the past few years, positive trends have emerged in the development of the Russian economy, outpacing some global processes. For example, the growth rate of the world gross product in 2002 they were 2.8%, in 2003. - 2.5%, and the growth rates of Russian GDP amounted to 4.1% and 7.3%, respectively.

The growth of production and GDP that has been outlined in the last two years and is forecasted in Russia can be regarded as a sustainable trend only if it is possible to make maximum use of favorable conditions for the growth of domestic production (devaluation of the ruble, growth in world oil prices) and other market factors that Unfortunately, they may be reversible.

However, for all the shortcomings of the country's economic policy, one cannot fail to see that the free access of Russian producers to foreign markets is limited by far from liberal measures: the practice of double standards is widely used in relation to Russia, as well as special concessions and demands in domestic and foreign markets. economic policy, the pressure of external debt.

As a result, Russia, with a weakened and unbalanced economy, must fit into an international situation characterized by at least three main intractable problems:

The split of civilization
· the growing unpredictability of global economic processes, especially in the field of financial movement;
· opposition of the national management of many countries to the methods and forms of globalization.

Russia has on world markets as competitive advantages as well as weaknesses. Competitive advantages include:

a) high availability of mineral resources - 13% of the world's proven oil reserves, 36% of natural gas, 12% of coal are concentrated in Russia;
b) a significant amount of accumulated fixed production assets and funds of universal equipment, which makes it possible to reduce the capital intensity of the technological modernization of a number of industries (although a significant part of them has a long service life and wear and tear);
c) cheap labor combined with enough high level her qualifications;
d) the presence of unique advanced technologies in a number of industries, especially in the military-industrial complex, etc.

It should be noted that these advantages lose their nature over time - natural resources are exhausted, equipment and new technologies become obsolete, skilled labor is aging and emigrating.

At the same time, many Russian competitive advantages are limited by Russia's strategic weaknesses, which include:

a) weakness of the system for supporting the competitiveness of Russian exports;
b) a sharp reorientation of foreign economic relations to the West and an increase in deformations in this area (increasing the raw material orientation of Russian exports, the loss of traditional sales markets);
c) blocking entry to markets where Russia has competitive advantages;
d) competitive technologies used in the military-industrial complex are focused on the production of small series of products with a weak level of control of material costs;
e) a rapid decline in domestic demand for science-intensive products, which destroys the already weak competitive environment for the "running in" of goods and technologies prior to their promotion to the foreign market.

However, for modern Russia increasingly expanding interaction with the world market. Russia's share in world GDP after the 1998 crisis has a constant upward trend. This also leads to increased threats associated with the foreign economic sphere.

Problems of Ensuring Russia's Economic Security during the Economic Crisis. Scientific work: Economic security of the Russian Federation

Similar posts