CC BY
35
МИРОВАЯ ЭКОНОМИКА И МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫЕ ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКИЕ ОТНОШЕНИЯ
Н А Ц И О Н А Л Ь Н Ы Е Э К О Н О М И К И В У С Л О В И Я Х Г Л О Б А Л И З А Ц И И
Лебедева Людмила Федоровна
доктор экономических наук, профессор, руководитель Центра социально-экономических исследований Института США и Канады РАН.
Адрес: Институт США и Канады РАН, 123995, Москва, Хлебный пер., д. 2/3.
E-mail: [email protected]
Проблемы процесса глобализации и его влияния на национальные экономики становятся все более актуальными, в том числе и благодаря геополитическим изменениям. Тематика Международных Лихачевских чтений (2016) охватывала широкий спектр политических, экономических, социально-культурных аспектов человеческого развития. В числе ключевых пунктов повестки данного международного форума - национальные экономики и глобализация, поиск новых драйверов экономического роста, неравенство, социальная политика и бюджетные ограничения, национальные интересы и международная интеграция. Выдающиеся философы, экономисты, дипломаты стран мира пытались найти ответы на новые вызовы, выработать направления укрепления сотрудничества между странами и снижения напряженности в их взаимоотношениях. Возможности и риски национальных экономик в условиях глобализации существенно различаются. Что касается российской экономики, то, оставаясь чрезвычайно зависимой от мирового рынка нефти, она остро нуждается в новых подходах к привлечению инвестиций в другие отрасли (несырьевые), а также в повышении конкурентоспособности, развитии торговых отношений и расширении сфер международного сотрудничества.
Ключевые слова: глобализация, национальные экономики, неравенство, экономический рост, социальная политика.
N A T I O N A L E C O N O M I E S I N T H E C O N T E X T O F G L O B A L I Z A T I O N
Lebedeva, Liudmila F.
Doctor of Economics, Professor, Head of the Center for Social-Economic Studies of the Institute for USA and Canada Studies of Russian Academy of Sciences.
Address: The Institute for USA and Canada Studies of Russian Academy of Sciences. Khlebny per., 2/3, Moscow, 123995, Russian Federation. E-mail: [email protected]
The problems of globalization and its impact on national economies have become even more hot than ever, due to certain geopolitical changes in the world, among other factors. The issues that have been discussed at the International Likhachov scientific conference (2016) concern political, economic, social, cultural spheres of human development. National economies and globalization; new economic growth drivers, inequality, social policy and budget limits; national interests and integration processes were among the key points of the agenda. The distinguished philosophers, economists, diplomats from all over the world tried to find answers to new challenges and formulate possible steps for enhancing cooperation between countries and reducing the intensity of the confrontation. It was pointed out that the chances and risks of national economics under globalization differ. As to Russian economy, it remains extremely dependant on the situation at the world oil market and needs new approaches to attract investment for other sectors development, increase competitiveness, conclude new trade agreements; find new areas of cooperation. At the same time it must be more human oriented.
Keywords: globalization, national economies, inequality, economic growth, social policy.
he International Likhachov Scientific Conference is one of the world's
most significant forums on a wide range of actual problems in the
humanitarian sphere. Being held according to the Decree of the Russian President V. V. Putin «On perpetuating the memory of Dmitry Sergeyevich Likhachov», this forum brings together prominent public figures, scientists of the different branches of knowledge to share their ideas.
The XVI International Likhachov Scientific Conference, held at St. Petersburg University of the Humanities and Social Sciences in May 2016, was devoted to the problems of Global Challenges and National Interests. Оne of the main topics of discussions was national economies in the context of globalization. The distinguished' philosophers, economists, diplomats from all over the world presented their views on the subjects, connected with tendencies of the globalization processes and national interests, globalization and its effect on national economies.
Geopolitical risks has brought not only new chances, but additional obstacles to economic and human development, as well. The increasing vulnerability and instability tend to affect international relations. So the
participants of the XVI International Likhachov Scientific Conference -philosophers, economists, diplomats from all over the world - tried to find answers to new challenges and formulate possible steps for enhancing cooperation between countries and reducing the intensity of the confrontation.
Among the prominent public figures, researchers, who took the floor, were the Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the International Likhachov Scientific Conference, Rector of St. Petersburg University of the Humanities and Social Sciences, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences eA. S. Zapesotsky; Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation G. M. Gatilov; the academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. A. Chereshnev, S. Yu. Glazyev, R. S. Grinberg, A. A. Guseinov, V. L. Makarov, A. D. Nekipelov; Professor of Lomonosov Moscow University, Dr. Sc. V. N. Rastorguyev; Professor of School of public administration of Lyndon B. Johnson at the Texas University (Austin, USA), James K. Galbraith; Director of the Research Institute at the Kozminski University (Warsaw), Doctor of Economics, professor Grzegorg W. Kolodko; Head of Department of Economic Science at Shijiazhuang Railway University (China), Dr. Sc , Professor Junyong Zhang.
Does globalization promote development? Or may increase the inequalities between and within nations; helps the rich get richer and the poor poorer? What should we do to eliminate the poverty, taking into consideration that extreme global poverty has diminished, but is still high in some regions; and in many countries inequalities have deepened, and much of humankind continues to live on less than 2 US dollars and even 1 US dollar a day?
What is the potential impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership on the national economies of the participants and outsiders (if it's ratified) and the perspectives of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations(TTIP) ? The reports reveal that the views differ, not to mention polarized, toward these topics.
A lot of questions concerning globalization, its influence on the national economies, government policies, and the ways of social - economic development, instruments of regulation on the global and national levels were discussed. Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation G. M. Gatilov noted that «Over the past year, global situation remained complex and quite mobile due to the deep-seated shifts in the geopolitical landscape meant to create a new polycentric world order model. ...Contradictions related to uneven global development, widening gap between the well-being levels of countries, struggle for resources, access to market outlets, control over transport routes are aggravated» [1].
One of the key debatable points at the Conference was the government internal and external policies under the new trends of globalization.
The thesis of A. S. Zapesotsky, Rector of St. Petersburg University of the Humanities and Social Sciences, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, were devoted to «The USA Struggling for Control over the European Union» [4].
Professor A. S. Zapesotsky noted that «The US policy toward Western Europe is determined by the desire to keep it under complete control in connection with the growing confrontation with the rapidly developing China». In his view recent decades demonstrated that the best results in the global competition of social and economic systems are obtained by following the convergence theory by taking the best from the socialism and the capitalism in terms of specific national and cultural conditions of a country.
The European Union is moving in the same direction by creating a welfare state. As to USA, «The impossibility of a direct confrontation with China is forcing the USA to focus on other scenarios of retaining their positions. In terms of the EU, their main task is to derail a Big European project «From Gibraltar to the Bering Strait» and to impose on the European Union a transatlantic common market project».
Actually the transatlantic integration is affected by expanding economic interconnections and shifting power balances, increasing the complexity of integration trends, Brexit, etc. The TTIP was meant to be one of the president Obama's legacies, but opposition to the deal has been growing. Not less important changes take place within the US and Europe. As to the changes in US, professor A. S. Zapesotsky noted that US Congressional Budget Office expects that in 5 years net interest payments will amount to more than 500 billion US dollars.
To say more, next year (2017 fiscal year), due to the extraordinary budget deficits and the increasing debt, net interest payments are expected to be 302,7 billion US dollars - nearly half of the national defense expenditures of US (616,6 billion US dollars)1. The inevitability of these payments not only has contributed to the federal budget structural changes, but has become a limit for financing US budget priorities in future.
In fact, during B. Obama's period as a president, the main shift in the federal budget expenditures has been the unprecedented growth of financing «Human resources» (one of the main parts of the US federal budget). The share of this (social) part in the total expenditures of the federal budget has reached 72%. At the same time experts note increasing in
1 US Federal Budget. F.Y. 2017. - Washington, 2016.
inequality in the distribution of income and wealth in the contemporary US society, which may be one of the barriers to increasing economic growth.
The inequality trends on the global, regional, national, local levels were among the key points at the Conference. The view of James K. Galbraith, Professor of School of public administration of Lyndon B. Johnson at the Texas University (Austin, USA), whose research focuses on the problems of measurements and understanding the causes and consequences of inequality [11] and who was (with Angus Deaton) awarded the Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic
Thought in 2014 for their work on poverty, inequality, and well-being, is of special interest. As Professor James K. Galbraith have argued in The End of Normal [12], the right approach is an economics of moderation and this must come, «by finding ways to work within the constraints, to use human potential within well-organized institutions, to provide security for all, and to conserve our natural resources and the planet as best we can».
Professor James K. Galbraith has presented the evolution of theoretical approaches to meet financial - economic challenges, pointing that «The Great Financial Crisis briefly brought reality back into focus. For a moment, amidst the panic, the shock was so great and the sense of intellectual disorder so overwhelming that the guardians of the efficient market hypothesis were stupefied» [3].
At that time, a few of the surviving true Keynesians, notably Paul Davidson [10] and Robert Skidelsky [13], saw for a moment the hope of a return of the Master. By this, they meant a final reckoning of the first crisis and perhaps also an element of just revenge for the decades spent out in the cold. But the moment passed. There was no return; there was no revival; there was no resurrection. The revival was killed as the economic crisis unfolded, and not by Keynes's declared enemies who had been stupefied into silence, but by some of his self-proclaimed friends. This is a group, according to Professor James K. Galbraith, that one may call «the false Keynesians».
While speaking about normality, Professor James K. Galbraith addressed to Joan Robinson's words: «There is no such thing as a normal period of history. Normality is a fiction of economic textbooks. An economist sets up the model which is specified in such a way as to have a normal state. He takes a lot of trouble to prove the existence of normality in his model. The fact that evidently the world does exist is claimed as a strong point for the model. .But the world does not exist in a state of normality» [Citation from: 3].
It was also quite adequate to compare the measurement of economic inequality with blood pressure in the human body. As to Professor James K. Galbraith , there is a range that one can consider healthy. «Within that range, a lower reading is evidence of a greater degree of efficiency and
stability - that is, of better health. Too low pressure is a problem. It may lead to sluggishness. Zero inequality, like zero blood pressure, is a value found only in the morgue. And then there is the question of what happens when inequality rises above the top end of the safe range. As with blood pressure, this is a sign of trouble» [3].
To proceed the inequality topic, it's really time to focus on the problem of disparities among in the context of job places quality. It concerns not only the level of earnings, the risk of unemployment, working-time arrangements etc., but also the access to retirement benefits, to medical care and social benefits. While the Government Social Security system, for example, provides basic protection in the form of the guaranteed pensions to retired persons, employer-provided plans present an additional source of retirement income which has become more and more important. But the access to such plans differs greatly. As to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, employer-provided retirement benefits were available to 66 percent of private industry workers in the United States in 2015, but only (!) to 31 percent of private industry workers in the lowest wage category (the 10th percentile) [14].
Taking into consideration that key factor in americans' retirement confidence Factor in Americans' Retirement Confidence nowadays, the access to and the participation in employer's retirement plans have become crucial for the future retirement income.
Meanwhile the access vary greatly among private industry workers and depend whether they are in the lowest or in the highest wage category, full-time workers or part-time workers, working at the large or at the small firm. Lower-income and part-time workers find it harder to contribute sufficient amount to voluntary schemes, personal accounts; they also might be less prepared for making the decisions concerning investment of their pension resources. Meanwhile this trend may lead to increasing inequality among future retirees [6].
In continuation of the discussion, Director of the Research Institute at the Kozminski University (Warsaw), Doctor of Economics, professor Grzegorg W. Kolodko considered that we have only one way - new pragmatism. The new pragmatism - is the theoretical concept and a proposition of economic policy, policy of economic growth and development, it is possible to tell, eclectic which on the basis of social market economy speaks about balances of the present. It's not only economic balance of production, sales, investments, export, import, the budget fluctuations, but also balance in social sense, inclusive economy. From this point of view the section of the income - is very big problem.
Professor Grzegorg W. Kolodko pointed that «In the short run, the expansion of social market economy is not on the agenda, because more urgent challenges must be addressed. However, in the longer run a kind of
global social market economy seems to be the only sensible option for the future of the mankind» [5]. It seems to be very important that professor Grzegorg W. Kolodko warned about possible utopian approaches to the problems of inequality elimination. Mentioning that the world, with 7 billion people already and 9 billion in 35 years from now, have so many inequality and contradictions, with a variety of hardly compatible values and agendas, he stated that all countries of the world never will look like the social market economies of social-democratic Scandinavian countries. «Yet it can be less conflicting and more progressing if only there will be balanced and sustainable development. .It is not possible to get to a perfect world, yet it is worth it to keep moving there» [5].
The problems of inequality in the context of globalization were also brought up by G. Malinowski, assistant Professor at the Kozminski University: «Globalisation has changed and still changes the reference point of individual people. People no longer compare themselves only with their neighbours and compatriots but more frequently they compare themselves with rich nations or with individuals, who moved to rich countries. Therefore not local, regional or national but global inequalities are becoming more and more important from the perspective of research adequacy» [7].
The participants pointed that the chances and risks of national economics under globalization differ. As to Russian economy, it remains extremely dependant on the situation at the world oil market and needs new approaches to attract investment for other sectors development, increase competitiveness, conclude new trade agreements; find new areas of cooperation.
At the same time it must be more human oriented. Searching for the new opportunities was in the focus of many presentations, including corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences A. S. Zapesotsky; the academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. A. Chereshnev, S. Yu. Glazyev, R. S. Grinberg, A. D. Nekipelov.
S. Yu. Glazyev, the academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Advisor to the President Vladimir Putin on regional economic integration, stated that «today's changes of the global economical and political system, as in previous historical periods, are due to the processes of replacement of technological and global economic patterns. .The concept of the global economic pattern is defined as the system of interrelated international and national institutes that provide for expanded reproduction of the economy and determine the mechanism of global economic relations» [2].
So «Russia may use substitution of the America-centric model of the world with a new one, oriented at harmonic cooperation in Asia, and may become an important link in this new centre of the global economy, if it starts implementing a similar policy of anticipatory growth of the new technological pattern and utilize institutions of the integral global economic
pattern». The academician S. Yu. Glazyev noted that «This will make it possible to ensure a stable growth of economy with the rate of at least 6-8% of GDP growth per year, successful development of Eurasian integration. ...Otherwise Russia will find itself torn between the old and new centre of the global economy (USA and China), and its certain parts will remain in the resource periphery of the global market» [2].
The economists also analyzed the instruments of internal policy. V. V. Zyabrikov, PhD., Associate Professor, the Department of Economics of Enterprise and Entrepreneurship, St. Petersburg State University, for example, brought up the problem of tax policy. The global financial and economic crisis put governments in front of challenges concerning taxes -whether to support the overall consolidation efforts while at the same time stimulate economic growth and finance social benefits.
In Russia «Normalization potential of the tax burden today is completely exhausted, and any decrease in tax rates will lead to a decrease in tax revenues. At the same time, the increase of rates does not lead to positive results either.The country [Russia] has implemented a policy of fiscal neutrality, in which the tax system performs mostly a fiscal function, hardly playing a regulatory and social role,» as it's in many other countries [8].
Although western sanctions have been denounced in the countries of EU as of high cost (from time to time), the EU has continued to renew them. These sanctions, really, have had a negative impact on the Russian economy, our international trade. Any sanctions under the process of globalization are characterized by E. G. Kholnova, professor, the head of the Department of Economics and Management of St. Petersburg University of the Humanities and Social Sciences, as destructive, with "boomerang effect» [9].
Professor A. S. Zapesotsky also considered that «The need for a strategic review of the general development direction toward the West is intensified for Russia, regardless of the political situation, conflicts with the EU and the USA and sanctions. It is crucial that in the last decade our country delivered another development project being articulated clearly and not fitting into the Anglo-Saxon vision of the future, the Eurasian project. In the opinion of V. Putin, this union is aimed, ultimately, not against the EU, but for the integration therewith» [4].
Список литературы
1. Гатилов Г. М. Международные отношения и глобальные вызовы на современном этапе / / Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы : XVI Международные Лихачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - URL: http://www.lihachev.ru/chten /2016/ plen/
2. Глазьев С. Ю. Стратегия антикризисной политики России в условиях смены технологических и мирохозяйственных укладов / / Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы : XVI Международные Лихачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - URL: http:/ / www.lihachev.ru/ chten/2016/plen/
3. Гэлбрейт Д. К. Стагнирующая экономика и новый прагматизм: кризис и эволюция экономики / / Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы» : XVI Международные Лихачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - URL: http://www.lihachev.ru/chten /2016/ plen/
4. Запесоцкий А. С. Борьба США за контроль над Евросоюзом // Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы : XVI Международные Лихачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - URL: http:/ / www.lihachev.ru/ chten/2016/plen/
5. Колодко Г. В. Не вашингтонский и не пекинский консенсус, а новый прагматизм / / Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы» : XVI Международные Лихачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - URL: http://www.lihachev.ru/chten/2016/plen/
6. Лебедева Л. Ф. Стратегии пенсионного обеспечения: американский выбор / / Мировая экономика и международные отношения. -2016. - № 8. - С. 44-52.
7. Малиновски Г. Глобализация, модели потребления и политическая стабильность / / Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы» : XVI Международные Лихачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - http: / / www.lihachev.ru/chten/2016/plen/
8. Зябриков В. В. Стратегическое управление налогообложением в условиях глобализации / / Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы» : XVI Международные Лихачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - URL: http://www.lihachev.ru/chten/2016 /sec3/
9. Хольнова Е. Г. Влияние антироссийских санкций на развитие российской экономики в условиях глобализации / / Современные глобальные вызовы и национальные интересы» : XVI Международные Ли-
хачевские научные чтения. 19-21 мая 2016 года. - URL: http: / / www. li-hachev.ru/ chten/2016/sec3/
10. Davidson P. The Keynes Solution: The Path To Global Economic Prosperity. - New York : Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
11. Galbraith J. K. Inequality and Instability: A Study of the World Economy Just Before the Great Crisis. Oxford University Press, 2012.
12. Galbraith J. K. The End of Normal: The Great Crisis and the Future of Growth. - New York : Free Press, 2014.
13. Skidelsky R. Keynes: Return of the Master. - New York : Public Affairs, 2010.
14. US Bureau of Labor Statistics. - URL: http://www.bls.gov/ news. release/pdf/ebs2.pdf
References
1. Gatilov G. M. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya i global'nye vyzovy na sovremennom etape [The International Relations and Global Challenges at the Present Stage], Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the 16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http://www.lihachev.ru/chten_eng/2016/
2. Glaz'ev S. Yu. Strategiya antikrizisnoy politiki Rossii v us-loviyakh smeny tekhnologicheskikh i mirokhozyaystvennykh ukladov [Strategy Russian Anti-Crisis Policy in the Change of Technological and World Economy Ways.] Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the 16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http://www.lihachev.ru/chten_eng/2016/
3. Gelbreyt D. K. Stagniruyushchaya ekonomika i novyy pragmatizm: krizis i evolyutsiya ekonomiki [Backwater Economics and New Pragmatism: Crises and Evolution of Economics] Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the 16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http:// www. liha-chev.ru/chten_eng/2016/
4. Zapesotskiy A. S. Bor'ba SShA za kontrol' nad Evrosoyuzom [The USA Struggling for Control over the European Union] Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the 16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http:// www. liha-chev.ru/chten_eng/2016/
5. Kolodko G. V. Ne vashingtonskiy i ne pekinskiy konsensus, a novyy pragmatism [Neither Wahington, Nor Beijing Consensus, but the New Pragmatism] Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the
16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http:// www.lihachev.ru/chten_eng/2016/
6. Lebedeva L. F. Strategii pensionnogo obespecheniya: amerikanskiy vybor [Pension Security Strategies: US Choice] World Economy and International Relations, 2016, No. 8, pp. 44-52. (In Russ.).
7. Malinovski G. Globalizatsiya, modeli potrebleniya i politicheskaya stabil'nost' [Globalisation, Consumption Patterns and Political Stability] Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the 16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http:// www.lihachev.ru/chten_eng/2016/
8. Zyabrikov V. V. Strategicheskoe upravlenie nalogooblozheniem v usloviyakh globalizatsii [Strategic Taxation Management Under Globalization] Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the 16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http://www. lihachev.ru/chten/2016/plen/
9. Khol'nova E. G. Vliyanie antirossiyskikh sanktsiy na razvitie rossiyskoy ekonomiki v usloviyakh globalizatsii [The Impact of Antirussian Sanctions on the Russian Economy Development Under Globalization] Contemporary Global Challenges and National Interests : the 16th International Likhachov Scientific Conference, May 19-21, 2016. (In Russ.). Available at: http://www. lihachev.ru/chten/2016/plen/
10. Davidson P. The Keynes Solution: The Path To Global Economic Prosperity, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
11. Galbraith J. K. Inequality and Instability: A Study of the World Economy Just Before the Great Crisis. Oxford University Press, 2012.
12. Galbraith J. K. The End of Normal: The Great Crisis and the Future of Growth, New York, Free Press, 2014.
13. Skidelsky R. Keynes: Return of the Master, New York, Public Affairs, 2010.
14. US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Available at: http://www.bls.gov/ news.release/pdf/ebs2.pdf
