The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 4/2024. Issues of Economic theory.

Yuriy V. Belousov

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Head of the Center for Budget Openness Monitoring, Financial Research Institute of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0002-6901-1985

Olga I. Timofeeva

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Senior Researcher of the Center for Budget Openness Monitoring, Financial Research Institute of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, Associate Professor of the Department of Public Finance, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0001-9255-4753

BUDGET OPENNESS IN MODERN CONCEPTS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

7-25

355.45 KB

Full text

Abstract

Budget openness is a new phenomenon in public administration and in the socio-economic life of society, which appeared due to the development of information technologies. Monitoring of openness shows significant inequality in the level of budget transparency in different countries. The article examines the role and place of budget openness in modern concepts of public administration, such as the concept of M. Weber (Weberian), New Public Management and Good Governance. The work reveals the features of the implementation of budget openness mechanisms in the considered concepts of public administration and their causes. Also, proposals are formulated to increase the openness of the budgets so that it can work to improve the efficiency of public finance management. Promising areas of research include the development of mechanisms to improve the economic efficiency of public finance management through open budgets.

Keywords: open (transparent) budget, public finances, citizen participation in the management of public finances, Weberian concept, new public management, good governance, new public governance, efficiency of public finance management.

JEL: H61, G18

EDN: CQDMOV

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_4_7_25

References

1. Hood C. Accountability and Transparency: Siamese Twins, Matching Parts, Awkward Couple? // West European Politics. 2010. Vol. 33. No. 5. P. 989–1009. DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2010.486122.
2. Montes G. C., Luna P. H. Fiscal transparency, legal system and perception of the control on corruption: empirical evidence from panel data // Empirical Economics. 2021. Vol. 60. No. 4. Pp. 2005–2037. DOI: 10.1007/s00181-020-01849-9.
3. Bastida F., Benito B. Central government budget practices and transparency: An international comparison // Public Administration. 2007.Vol. 85. No. 3. Pp. 667–716. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00664.x.
4. Cuadrado-Ballesteros B., Bisogno M. Budget transparency and financial sustainability // Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management. 2022. Vol. 34. No. 6. 210–234. DOI: 10.1108/JPBAFM-02-2022-0025.
5. Wallis J., Gregory R. Leadership, Accountability and Public Value: Resolving a Problem in “New Governance”? // International Journal of Public Administration. 2009. Vol. 32. 3–4. Pp. 250–273. DOI: 10.1080/01900690902732608.
6. Rhodes R.A.W. Network Governance and the Differentiated Polity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
7. Denhardt R.B., Denhardt J.V. The New Public Service: Serving Rather Than Steering. // Public Administration Review. 2000. Vol. 60. No. 6. Pp. 549–559. DOI: 10.1111/0033-3352.00117.
8. Jessop B. Capitalism and Its Future: Remarks on Regulation, Government and Governance // Review of International Political Economy. 1997. Vol. 4. No. 3. 561–581. DOI: 10.1080/096922997347751.
9. Weber M. Economy and Society. Essays on understanding sociology. In 4 vol. Vol. 1. M: HSE Publishing House, 2021. (In Russ.).
10. Belousov Y., Timofeeva O. Methodological Aspects of Compiling Open Budget Rankings // Financial Journal. 2021. Vol. 13. No. 4. Pp. 122–138. DOI: 10.31107/2075-1990-2021-4-122-138.
11. Pollitt C. (Author), Bouckaert G. (Contributor). Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis – Into the Age of Austerity. 4th Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
12. Hood C. A. Public Management for all Seasons? //Public Administration. 1991. Vol. 69. No. 1. Pp. 3–19. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x.
13. Pollitt C. Justification by Works or by Faith?: Evaluating the New Public Management. Evaluation. 1995. No. 1(2). Pp. 133–154. DOI: 10.1177/135638909500100202.
14. Osborne D., Gaebler T. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Penguin, 1993.
15. Lapuente V., Van de Walle S. The effects of new public management on the quality of public services. Governance. 2020. Vol. 33. No. 3. Pp. 461–475. DOI: 10.1111/gove.12502.
16. Obolonskij A.V. Bureaucracy in search of a new model (the evolution of the theory and practice of public administration in recent decades) // Social Sciences and Modernity. 2014. No. 3. Pp. 5–22. EDN: SHFLOJ. (In Russ.).
17. Smorgunov L.V. Modern trends in public administration: from new public management to public policy management // Political science. 2022. No. 3. Pp. 100–121. DOI: 10.31249/poln/2022.03.05. (In Russ.).
18. Dunleavy P., Margetts H., Bastow S., Tinkler J. New Public Management Is Dead—Long Live Digital-Era Governance // Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 2006. Vol. 16. No 3. Pp. 467–494. DOI:10.1093/jopart/mui057.
19. Bratchenko S.A. Quality of public administration: the content of the concept // The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2020. No. 6. 80–94. DOI: 10.24411/2073-6487-2020-10071. (In Russ.).
20. Hood C. The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public Management. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998.
21. Argynades D. Good Governance. Professionalism, Ethics and Responsibility // International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2006. No. 72 (2). Pp. 155–170. DOI: 10.1177/0020852306064607.
22. Ponkin I.V. On the concept and notion of “Good Governance” // Public service. 2013. No. 4 (84). Pp. 39–42. EDN: RSDQPF. (In Russ.).
23. Budget Transparency Toolkit: Practical Steps for Supporting Openness, Integrity and Accountability in Public Financial Management. Paris: OECD, 2027.
24. The Power of Making It Simple: A Government Guide to Developing Citizens Budgets. [S.]: The International Budget Partnership, 2006.
25. Folscher A. Budget transparency. New frontiers in transparency and accountability. London: Open Society Foundation, 2010.
26. Jung H. Online Open Budget: The Effects of Budget Transparency on Budget Efficiency // Public Finance Review. 2022.Vol. 50. No. 1. Pp. 91–119. DOI: 10.1177/10911421221093412.
27. Tormey S. The Contemporary Crisis of Representative Democracy // Democratic Theory. 2014. Vol. 1. No. 2. Pp. 104–112. DOI: 10.3167/dt.2014.010211.
28. Innerarity D. Politics in the Times of Indignation. The Crisis of Representative Democracy. [S.]: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2011.
29. De Renzio P., Lakin J. Reframing Public Finance. Promoting Justice, Democracy, and Human Rights in Government Budgets. [S.]: The International Budget Partnership, 2019.
30. Barabashev A.G. Crisis of public administration and its impact on the main administrative paradigms of the state and bureaucracy // Issues of state and municipal administration. 2016. No. 3. Pp. 163–194. EDN: WMQQAN. (In Russ.).
31. Krasil‘nikov D.G., Sivinceva O.V., Troickaya E.A. Modern Western management models: synthesis New Public Management and Good Government // Ars Administrandi. 2014. No. 2. Pp. 45–62. EDN: SLJNWL. (In Russ.).

Manuscript submission date: 27.06.2024

For citation:

Belousov Y.V., Timofeeva O.I. Budget openness in modern concepts of public administration // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2024. № 4. Pp. 7-25. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2024_4_7_25 EDN: CQDMOV

  Creative Commons 4.0

The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 2/2023. Issues of Economic theory.

Oleg Yu. Boldyrev

Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor at the Department of Political Economy of the Faculty of Economics of Lomonosov Moscow State University;

Assistant at the Department of Constitutional and Municipal Law of the Faculty of Law of Lomonosov Moscow State University;

Leading Researcher at the Institute for Economic Policy and Economic Security Problems of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia

ON THE ISSUE OF CONSTITUTIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY IN THE FRAMEWORK OF "INSTITUTIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY"

73-85

351.02 KB

Open .pdf

Abstract

The article presents a brief summary of the development of political economy. The fundamental differences between the methodology of political economy and the methodology of economics are briefly described. It is shown that modern political economy is not reduced to either Marxism or the "new political economy" of J. Buchanan. The relevance of research within the framework of institutional political economy, which is capable of developing the achievements of classical political economy, traditional institutionalism and institutional evolutionary theory, is substantiated. It is proposed to develop constitutional political economy within the framework of this particular area of political and economic research.

Keywords: constitutional political economy, constitutional economics, political economy, institutional political economy, traditional institutionalism, methodology of economic science.

JEL: А12, А13, В1, В2, В4, В52, К00.

EDN: QCYHNA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2023_2_73_85

References

1. Alle M. Economics as a science. M., 1995. (In Russ).
2. Arrighi J. Adam Smith in Beijing. What did the 21st century inherit. M.: Institute of public design. 2009. (In Russ).
3. Barenboim P.D. Russian school of constitutional economics (constitutional political economics, constitutional legal economics). Phantoms, myths and terms of constitutional economic theory // Yearbook of Constitutional Economics. 2018 / Managing editors S.A. Avakyan, P.D. Barenboim, V.V. Komarov. Compiled by P.D. Barenboim. M.: LUM. 2018. Рр. 7–18. (In Russ).
4. Boldyrev O.Yu. The Political Economic Analysis of Law and Constitutional Political Economy as an Alternative to “Economic Imperialism” // Issues of Political Economy. 2023. No. 1. Рр. 94–108. (In Russ).
5. Boldyrev O.Yu. Constitutional reform-2020 and the economic development of Russia // Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2020. No. 5. Pр. 94–107. (In Russ).
6. Boldyrev O.Yu. Economic sovereignty of the state and the constitutional and legal mechanisms of its protection: monograph / scientific. ed. A. Avakyan. Moscow: Prospect. 2018. (In Russ).
7. Boyer R., Brousseau E., Kaye A., Favreau O. Toward the establishment of institutional political economy // Economic sociology. 2008. T. 9. No. 3. Рр. 17–25. (In Russ).
8. Buzgalin A.V., Kolganov A.I., Moskovsky A.I. Marxism and institutionalism: a comparative study // Moscow University Bulletin. Series 6: Economics, 2012. No. 5. Рp. 3–18. (In Russ).
9. Weiskopf T.E. Reflections on the fifty-year history of radical political economy // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Economy. 2015. Ser. 5. Issue. 1. Р. 69–84. (In Russ).
10. Walras L. Elements of pure political economy. M.: Izograph. 2000. (In Russ).
11. Voeikov M.I. Political economy in the Russian tradition: from Pososhkov to Abalkin / IV Russian Economic Congress “REK-2020”. Volume I. Thematic Conference “Political Economy” (collection of materials) / Compiled by D. A. Veselov, G. D. Gloveli, A. M. Libman. M. 2020. Р. 27–29. (In Russ).
12. Gloveli G.D. Geopolitical Economy in Russia from Discussions of Identity to Global Models (19th century – first third of the 20th century). SPb.: Aletheia. 2009. (In Russ).
13. Desai R. Geopolitical Economy: After American Hegemony, Globalization and Empire: Monograph / Radika Desai; scientific ed. Russian edition of S.D. Bodrunov. M.: INIR im. S.Yu. Witte: Center catalogue, 2020. (In Russ).
14. Dzarasov S.S. Where is Keynes calling Russia? M.: Algorithm. 2012. (In Russ).
15. Efimov V.M. Economics in question: different methodology, history and research practices. Monograph. M.: COURSE: INFRA-M. 2016. (In Russ).
16. Zhid Sh. The emergence and development of social economy in the XIX century. / Problems of the economy: From the history of social economy to the question of small-scale agriculture. Lectures by professors of the Russian Higher School of Social Sciences in Paris. Ed. Stereotype. M.: LENAND. 2022. (In Russ).
17. Kirdina-Chandler S.G. Radical institutionalism and fake economy in the 21st century // Journal of Institutional Studies, 2017. Vol. 9. No. 4. Pр. 6–16. (In Russ).
18. Maevsky V.I. On the evolutionary-synergetic paradigm in economics / Essays on economic synergetics / Ed. IN AND. Mayevsky, S.G. KirdinaChandler, M.A. Deryabina. M.: IE RAN, 2017. Рp. 9–17. (In Russ).
19. Mairowski F. Physics and “marginalist revolution” // TERRA ECONOMICUS, 2012. Vol. 10. No. 1. Pр. 100–116. (In Russ).
20. Mill J.S. Fundamentals of political economy and some aspects of their application to social philosophy. M.: Progress Publishing House. 1980. Vol. 1. (In Russ).
21. Moskovsky A.I. Institutionalism: theory, decision-making basis, method of criticism // Questions of Economics. 2009. No. 3. Рp. 110–124. (In Russ).
22. Myrdal G. Modern problems of the “third world”. M.: Progress Publishing House. 1972. (In Russ).
23. Nureev R.M. Political Economy: Old and New // Journal of Institutional Studies. 2011. Vol. 3. No. 3. Pр. 4–10. (In Russ).
24. Oleinikov A.A. Political economy of the national economy. / Rev. ed. O.A. Platonov. M.: Institute of Russian 2010. (In Russ).
25. Ryazanov V.T. Russian school of economic thought: universal-general and nationalspecial // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. 2010. Ser. 5. № 4. Р. 66–84. (In Russ).
26. Sismondi S. New principles of political economy or wealth in relation to population. M.: State socio-economic publishing house. 1937. (In Russ).
27. Smith A. Research on the nature and causes of the wealth of nations [per. from English. P. Klyukina]. M.: Eksmo. 2016. (In Russ).
28. Sorokin D.E. Russian political and economic thought: main features and traditions // Questions of Economics, 2001. No. 2. Pр. 18–27. (In Russ).
29. Whitehead A. Selected Works in Philosophy. M., 1990. (In Russ).
30. Fedotova V.G., Kolpakov V.A. The evolution of economic theory: from A. Smith to neo-Smithism // World of Changes. 2010. № 4. Рp. 9– 25. (In Russ).
31. Khudokormov A.G. Amartya Sen is a representative of the left-wing reformist direction of modern institutional theory (on the work of an Indian economist – Nobel Prize winner in economics) // Russian Economic Journal. 2008. No. 5–6. Рp. 45–69. (In Russ).
32. Chernavsky D.S. On the mathematical apparatus of evolutionary economics / Evolution of economic theory: reproduction, technology, institutions. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Evolutionary Economics and Methodological Seminar on Institutional and Evolutionary Economics. SPb.: Aleteyya, 2015. Рр. 294–300. (In Russ).
33. Schumpeter J. Ten great economists from Marx to Keynes [Text] / transl. from English. N. V. Avtonomova, I. M. Osadchey, N. A. Rozinskaya; under scientific ed. V.S. Avtonomov. M.: Ed. Gaidar Institute. 2011. (In Russ).
34. Ha-Joon Chang Breaking the Mould: An Institutionalist Political Economy Alternative to Neo-Liberal Theory of the Market and the State // Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2002, February. Pp. 539–559.
35. Luttwak E. From Geopolitics to Geo economics: Logic of Conflict, Grammar of Commerce. The National Interest. 1990.№20. Рp. 17–24.

Manuscript submission date: 01.03.2023

For citation:

Boldyrev O.Yu.  On the issue of constitutional political economy in the framework of «Institutional political economy» // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2023. № 2. Pp. 73-85. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2023_2_73_85 EDN: QCYHNA

  Creative Commons 4.0

The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 6/2023. Issues of Economic theory.

Petr A. Orekhovsky

Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Chief Researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

ORCID: 0000-0003-2816-1298

SOVIET STRUCTURALISM: E. PREOBRAZHENSKY, S. STRUMILIN, N. VOZNESENSKY, YU. YAREMENKO

109-133

364.37 KB

Full text

Abstract

Structuralism is a relatively young area of economic research, but it already has its own history in Russia. The first debates over the rates and proportions of the Soviet economy began back in the 1920s. The discussions between “geneticists” and “teleologists” were quite open then. Geneticists defended the traditionalist approach, relying on the exhaustion of the restoration impulse and the need to return the country to “normal”, average world growth rates and the accumulation rate of 16-18%. Teleologists relied on the “law of socialist accumulation” and the “theory of two regulators”. They were confident in the possibilities of accelerated development; even the “starting version” of the 1st Five-Year Plan provided for achieving an accumulation rate of more than 20%. And in the end, despite the monstrous mistakes the Bolshevik leadership made during collectivization, the teleologists turned out to be right. The 2nd Five-Year Plan was more successful — the planned savings rate was reduced, the production of consumer goods was increased, and it was possible to switch from cards to planned trade turnover. The idea of accelerated development and the discovery of the law of socialist accumulation belonged to E. Preobrazhensky, but its implementation, including through planned calculations, was carried out by S. Strumilin, and starting from the 3rd Five-Year Plan — by N. Voznesensky.

The end of the post-war period and the death of I. Stalin marked the end of “adaptive modernization”. The 8th Five-Year Plan, which aimed for faster growth of Group B industries over Group A, failed to be fulfilled. By the end of the 1970s the Soviet economy fell into inevitable stagnation. Economists of that time gave alarmist forecasts about the decline in growth rates, and proposed measures to overcome the crisis, but all of those were palliative in nature. The structuralist theory of multi-level economy by Yu. Yaremenko appeared at the same time. This theory contained a number of provisions that could be called heretical, contradicting both Marxism and the neoclassical mainstream. Despite its fruitfulness, it was ignored by both planners and Soviet leaders.

Keywords: structuralism, NEP, geneticists, damping curve, teleologists, structural crisis, multilevel economy.

JEL: B14, B15, B31, B59, N14

EDN: LFGKKN

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2023_6_109_133

References

1. Bethell T. Property and Prosperity. M.: IRISEN, 2008. (In Russ.).
2. Van der Wee G. History of the World Economy. 1945–1990. M.: Nauka, 1994. (In Russ.).
3. Voznesensky N.A. Academician N.A. Voznesensky. Essays. 1931–1947. M.: Nauka, 2018. (In Russ.).
4. Voznesensky N.A. Marxism and Counter-Revolutionary Idealism of Rubin. About I. Rubin’s Article in the Fifth Book of the “Marx and Engels Archive” // Voznesensky N.A. Academician N.A. Voznesensky. Essays. 1931–1947. M.: Nauka, 2018. Pp. 21–30. (In Russ.).
5. Galushka A., Niyazmetov A., Okulov M. Crystal of Growth Towards the Russian Economic Miracle. M.: Nashe zavtra, 2021. (In Russ.).
6. Glazyev S.Yu. Theory of Long-Term Technical and Economic Development. M.: VlaDar, 1993. (In Russ.).
7. Groman V.G. On Some Patterns Empirically Detected in Our National Economy // Planning Economy. 1925. No. 1. Pp. 88–101. (In Russ.).
8. Groman V.G. On Some Patterns Empirically Detected in Our National Economy // Planning economy. 1925. No. 2. Pp. 125–141. (In Russ.).
9. Kornai J. Deficit. M.: Nauka, 1990. (In Russ.).
10. Kotkin S. Armageddon averted. The Collapse of the Soviet Union, 1970 – 2000. M.: New Literary Review, 2018. (In Russ.).
11. Kritsman L. The Heroic Period of the Great Russian Revolution (Experience in Analyzing the So-Called “Military Communism”). M.–L.: State publishing house, 1925. (In Russ.).
12. Orekhovsky P.A. Left Utopia in the 21st Century // Social sciences and modernity. 2020. No. 2. Pp. 162–175. DOI: 10.31857/S086904990009214-7. (In Russ.).
13. Preobrazhensky E.A. New Economics (Theory and Practice): 1922–1928 M.: Publishing House of the Main Archive of Moscow, 2008. (In Russ.).
14. Sapov G. Three interviews with E.B. Ershov (February–March 1999). http://www.sapov.ru/staroe/si06.html (date of access: 04.11.2023). (In Russ.).
15. Sokolov A.S. Between Cards and Trade Turnover: The Second Soviet Five-Year Plan // Issues of theoretical economics. 2021. No. 2. Рp. 102–110. DOI: 10.52342/2587-7666VTE_2021_2_102_110. (In Russ.).
16. Strumilin S.G. Problems of Planning in the USSR. L.: Academy of Sciences USSR, 1932. (In Russ.).
17. Khlevnyuk O. Corporation of Impostors. Shadow Economy and Corruption in the Stalinist USSR. M.: New Literary Review, 2023. (In Russ.).
18. Shiller R. Irrational Optimism: How Reckless Behavior Drives Markets. M.: Alpina Publisher, 2013. (In Russ.).
19. Erlich A. Discussions about Industrialization in the USSR. 1924–1928. M.: Delo, 2010. (In Russ.).
20. Yaremenko Yu.V. Theory and Methodology for Researching Multi-Level Economics. M., Nauka, 1997. (In Russ.).
21. Yaremenko Yu.V. Economic Conversations. Recorded by S.A. Belanovsky. M.: Center for Research and Statistics of Science, 1999. (In Russ.).
22. Lewis W.A. The Theory of Economic Growth. N.Y.: Routledge, 1959.

Manuscript submission date: 01.11.2023

For citation:

Orekhovsky P.A. Soviet Structuralism: E. Preobrazhensky, S. Strumilin, N. Voznesensky, Yu. Yaremenko // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2023. № 6. Pp. 109-133. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2023_6_109_133 EDN: LFGKKN

  Creative Commons 4.0

The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences № 1/2023. Issues of Economic theory.

Vinokurov Stepan S.

Cand. Sci. (Econ.), associate professor, Department of general economics and history of economic thought, Saint Petersburg State University of Economics (UNECON), Saint Petersburg, Russia

BEHAVIORAL “ANOMALIES” AND THE COST OF DECISION-MAKING

40-57

403.04 KB

Open .pdf

Abstract

The author explores the possibility of generalizing the main results of behavioral economics (importance of the status-quo and notions of justice for decision-making, endowment effect, transactional utility, mental accounting, dynamic inconsistency and the lack of self-control, social preferences) based on the assumption of costly choices and the ability to refuse choice and maintain the status-quo, using the formalization of the rational inattention concept. The author shows that costly choices may explain why behavioral biases remain within economic logic, even in the case of a utility-maximizing individual. Some remarks on economic policy are made as a result.

Keywords: bounded rationality, behavioral economics, nudging, rational inattention.

JEL: D01, D11, D83, D9.

EDN: GMIPQL

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2023_1_40_57

References

1. Danilov V.I. Beyond Classical Rationality: Two-Stage Rationalization // Journal of the New Economic Association. 2015. No. 2. Pp. 12–35. (In Russ.).
2. Shastitko A. Behavioral Antitrust // Economic Policy. 2014. No. 6. Pp. 76-91. (In Russ.).
3. Bhargava S., Loewenstein G. Behavioral economics and public policy 102 // Beyond nudging. American Economic Review. 2015. Vol. 105. No. 5. Pp. 396–401. DOI: 10.1257/aer.p20151049.
4. Bordalo P., Gennaioli N., Shleifer A. Salience theory of choice under risk // The Quarterly journal of economics. 2012. Vol. 127. No. 3. Pp. 1243–1285. DOI: 10.1093/qje/qjs018.
5. Bordalo P., Gennaioli N., Shleifer A. Salience in experimental tests of the endowment effect // American Economic Review. 2012. Vol. 102. No. 3. Pp. 47–52. DOI: 10.1257/aer.102.3.47.
6. Camerer C., Issacharoff S., Loewenstein G., O’Donoghue T., Rabin M. Regulation for Conservatives: Behavioral Economics and the Case for “Asymmetric Paternalism” // University of Pennsylvania law review. 2003. Vol. 151. No. 3. Pp. 1211–1254. DOI: 10.2307/3312889.
7. Farhi E., Gabaix X. Optimal taxation with behavioral agents // American Economic Review. 2020. Vol. 110. No. 1. Pp. 298–336. DOI: 10.1257/aer.20151079.
8. Fehr E., Rangel A. Neuroeconomic Foundations of Economic Choice – Recent Advances // Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2011. Vol. 25. No. 4. Pp. 3–30. DOI: 10.1257/jep.25.4.3.
9. Gerasimou G. Asymmetric dominance, deferral, and status quo bias in a behavioral model of choice // Theory and Decision. 2016. Vol. 80. No. 2. Pp. 295–312. DOI: 10.1007/s11238-015-9499-7.
10. Gigerenzer G. On the supposed evidence for libertarian paternalism // Review of philosophy and psychology. 2015. Vol. 6. No. 3. Pp. 361–383. DOI 10.1007/s13164-015-0248-1.
11. Hausman D. M., Welch B. Debate: To nudge or not to nudge // Journal of Political Philosophy. 2010. Vol. 18. No. 1. Pp. 123–136. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00351.x.
12. Hébert B., Woodford M. Rational inattention and sequential information sampling. National Bureau of Economic Research. 2017. No. w23787. DOI: 10.3386/w23787.
13. Maćkowiak B., Matějka F., Wiederholt M. Dynamic rational inattention: Analytical results // Journal of Economic Theory. 2018. Vol. 176. Pp. 650–692. DOI: 10.1016/j.jet.2018.05.001.
14. Matějka F., McKay A. Rational inattention to discrete choices: A new foundation for the multinomial logit model // American Economic Review. 2015. Vol. 105. No. 1. Pp. 272–298. DOI: 10.1257/aer.20130047.

15. Mitchell G. Libertarian paternalism is an oxymoron // Northwestern University Law Review. 2004. Vol. 99. No. 3. Pp. 1245–1259.
16. Sims C. Implications of rational inattention // Journal of monetary Economics. 2003. Vol. 50. No. 3. Pp. 665-690. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3932(03)00029-1.
17. Sims C. Rational inattention: Beyond the linear-quadratic case // American Economic Review. 2006. Vol. 96. No. 2. Pp. 158–163. DOI: 10.1257/000282806777212431.
18. Steiner J., Stewart C., Matějka F. Rational Inattention Dynamics: Inertia and Delay in Decision-Making // Econometrica. 2017. Vol. 85. No. 2. Pp. 521–553. DOI: 10.3982/ECTA13636.
19. Thaler R. Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics. WW Norton & Company, 2015.
20. Thaler R., Sunstein C. Libertarian paternalism // American economic review. 2003. Vol. 93. No. 2. Pp. 175-179. DOI: 10.1257/000282803321947001.
21. Thaler R., Sunstein C. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Yale University Press, 2008.
22. Woodford M. Stochastic choice: An optimizing neuroeconomic model // American Economic Review. 2014. Vol. 104. No. 5. Pp. 495 –500. DOI: 10.1257/aer.104.5.495.

Manuscript submission date: 05.12.2022

For citation:

Vinokurov S.S. Behavioral «anomalies» and the cost of decision-making // Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk. 2023. №. 1 Pp. 40-57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52180/2073-6487_2023_1_40_57 EDN: GMIPQL

  Creative Commons 4.0