Theoretical foundations for training public servants and managers: the role of Economics

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the significance of contemporary economic science for training public servants for government bodies and managers for business. At present, prevailing theories are being revised, novel concepts and interpretations come into being, and governmental institutions undergo noticeable changes, trying to respond to emerging challenges, i.e. New Industrial Revolution, Energy Transition and Climate Change. With this purpose in mind, the authors offered three methodological approaches — metrics, political economy, narrative, all of which allow to study novel problems from different angles. The review of 1006 articles in 31 Russian economic journals for the period of 2010– 2021 upon three above-mentioned issues has shown, that, firstly, a greater part of publications refers to manufacturing development, secondly, metric (42%) and political economy (51%) approaches prevail in the research of all these issues. However, in the situation of uncertainty the prognostic value of economic modelling is decreasing, contradictions between political economy elaborations are growing up, and narrative approach is actually demanded for alternative interpretations of variable, frequently competitive, ideas and concepts concerning industrial transformation, energy transition and climate change. These three approaches correlate with the curricula of Russian and foreign universities in order to identify the promising fields to upgrade economic education of public servants in Russia. The authors conclude that there is a disparity between trends in economic research and modes in training public servants. Currently in higher education the teaching of economics rests on metric approach, but economic sciences also demand qualitative methods of research. Humanitarian dimension in economic education is indispensable since it helps to form abstract reasoning skills, important for the new generation of public servants capable of solving intricate and ambiguous problems.

1. Avtonomov, V. (2020). In search of a man: essays on the history and methodology of economic science. Under scientific editing by E. Riazantseva. Moscow; Saint-Peterburg: Gaidar Institute Press; Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences, SPbSU.

2. Aganbegyan, A. G. (2007). Notes on business education. Economic Policy, 4, 21–34.

3. Banerjee, A. V., Esther Duflo, E. (2021). Good Economics for Hard Times: better Answer to our Biggest Problems. Moscow; Saint-Peterburg: Gaidar Institute Press; Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences, SPbSU.

4. Bobylev, S. N., Vlasov, Yu.S., Kiryushin, P. A. (2013). Influence of ecologization of energy sector on human development. Moscow University Economic Bulletin, 1, 36–46.

5. Wartofsky, M. W. (1988). Models. Representation and the Scientific Understanding. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science. Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

6. Gazman, V. D. (2019). Overcoming stereotypes of renewable energy. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 4, 124–136. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-4-124-136

7. Golovin, A. P. (2011). What are we worth? Who are we waiting for? (an excursion into the history and geography of the failed gasification project of industrial regions of the south of the Irkutsk region). ECO Journal 6 (444), 57–56.

8. Gorbacheva, N. V., Filatova, N. G. (2021). Economic theory: from fundamental ideas to modern practice: textbook. RANEPA. Siberian Institute of Management. Novosibirsk: SibAGS.

9. Gurova, T., Sysoev, T. (2021). A state we don’t know. Expert, 23, 88–95.

10. Klistorin, V. I. (2011). Apologia of history or why its studying is necessary for the economist. Vestnik of Novosibirsk State University. Social and economic Sciences. Issue 11, 3, 186–195.

11. Kudrin, A. L. (2020). Economic development of Russia. M.: Publishing house “Delo” RANEPA.

12. Lenchuk, E. B. (eds.) (2020). Formation of the digital economy in Russia: challenges, prospects, risks: monograph. St. Petersburg: Aletheya.

13. Leontief W. (1990). Essays in Economics: theories, theorizing, facts, and policies. London: Oxford University Press.

14. Makarov, I. A., Chen, H., Paltsev, S. V. (2018). Impacts of Paris Agreement on Russian economy. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 4, 76–94. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-4-76-94

15. Obolonsky, A. V. (2015). An Essay on the History of The Russian and soviet bureaucratic Nomenclature. Public Administration, 3, 145–159.

16. Pakhomova, N. V., Richter, K. (2009). Formation of the modern model of the higher economic education in the context of foreign universities experience. St Petersburg University Journal of Economic Studies, 2, 98–111.

17. Plyusnina, V. V., Dalzhinova, I. A. (2008). Angarsk cascade: ecological consequences (2nd half of the XX century). Ulan-Ude: Buryat Publishing House. University.

18. Porfiriev B. N. (2019). The low-carbon development paradigm and climate change risk reduction strategy for the economy. Studies on Russian Economic Development, 2, 111–118.

19. Revich, B. A., Shaposhnikov, D. A. (2016). Climate change, heat waves, and cold spells as risk factors for increased mortality in some regions of Russia. Studies on Russian Economic Development, 2, 195–207.

20. Simonov, N. S. (2019). Economic and geographical features of domestic fuel and energy industry in historical context. ECO Journal, 3 (537), 146–165.

21. Stankevich, T. S. (2018). The use of convolutional neural networks to forecast the synamics of spreading forest fires in real time. Business Informatics, 4, 17–27.

22. Tutov, L. A., Rogozhnikova, V. N. (2018). Dilemma «Economist or Mathematician»: a Philosophical perspective. Moscow University Economic Bulletin, 1, 3–17.

23. Khanin, G. I. (2016). Whether we need the current economics and economic education? (On the book by V. M. Yefimov «Economic science in question»). Terra Economicus, 3, 145–

24. Chubutsky, P. P. (2008). Preconditions for real economic policy. The Economist. Favorites. M.: Publishing House «Territory of the Future».