Search results

This chapter is about the modern, Western education system as an economic system of production on behalf of the capitalist mode of production (CMP) and globalization towards a single, global social space around market capitalism, liberal democracy and individualism.

The schooling process is above all an economic process, within which educational labour is performed, and through which the education system operates in an integrated fashion with the (external) economic system.

It is mainly through children’s compulsory educational labour that modern schooling plays a part in the production of labour power, supplies productive (paid) employment within the CMP, meets ‘corporate economic imperatives’, supports ‘the expansion of global corporate power’ and facilitates globalization.

What children receive in exchange for their appropriated and consumed labour power within the education system are not payments of the kind enjoyed by adults in the external economy, but instead merely a promise – the promise enshrined in the Western education industry paradigm.

In modern societies, young people, like chattel slaves, are compulsorily prevented from freely exchanging their labour power on the labour market while being compulsorily required to perform educational labour through a process in which their labour power is consumed and reproduced, and only at the end of which as adults they can freely (like freed slaves) enter the labour market to exchange their labour power.

This compulsory dispossession, exploitation and consumption of labour power reflects and reinforces the power distribution between children and adults in modern societies, doing so in a way resembling that between chattel slaves and their owners.

The purpose of the research is to develop the algorithm of transition of modern socio-economic systems to “conflict-free” path of development, which would be universal and would take into account specifics of each separate system.

The methodology of the chapter includes a complex of general scientific methods – analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, and formalization; and the method of structural programming, which is used for determining a preferable structure and sequence of stages of the process of transition of modern socio-economic systems to “conflict-free” path of development, with compilation of its block scheme.

The algorithm (in the form of block scheme) of transition of modern socio-economic systems to “conflict-free” path of development is offered. The first stage of this algorithm is adaptation of the principles of “conflict-free” development of socio-economic system to peculiarities of its development and adoption of these principles. At the second stage, monitoring and control over quality of institute of economic activities in socio-economic system are conducted (determination of problems). The third stage is improvement of institutes of economic activities in socio-economic system (solving the determined problems). The fourth stage is search and establishment of balance in socio-economic system. The fifth stage is determining the signs of “conflict-free” character and forecasting of scenarios of development of socio-economic system and evaluation of effectiveness of development of “conflict-free” socio-economic system.

The developed algorithm allows overcoming drawbacks of the existing algorithm of crisis management of economic systems and has such advantages as the possibility of application by systems of any level, application at all phases of economic cycle, consideration of specifics of socio-economic systems, and cyclic character.

For sociological perspectives on globalization to do justice to its many facets, they must be informed by an understanding of modern societies as simultaneously complex, contingent, and contradictory – as modern capitalist societies. As is becoming ever more apparent, such an understanding of modern societies is the necessary precondition for identifying the defining features of globalization. Yet, for the most part, the history of the social sciences did not produce research agendas, theories, and methods designed to grasp complexity, contingency, and contradiction as core dimensions of modern social life that continually reinforce each other. The social sciences did not evolve as ongoing efforts to grasp the gravity each dimension exerts on concrete forms of political, economic and cultural life, and how the force of each depends on the constant exchange of energy with the other two. To the extent that scrutinizing the impact of globalization on the future – and possible futures – of human civilization is the primary challenge for social scientists to confront today, the current condition presents a unique, and perhaps most unusual opportunity to conceive anew the promise of each and all the social sciences, as elucidating how the complex, contingent, and contradictory nature of modern societies, in the name of advancing social justice, has engendered a regime of managing “social problems.”

For perspectives on globalization to do justice to its many facets, they must be informed by an understanding of modern societies as simultaneously complex, contingent, and contradictory – as modern capitalist societies. As is becoming ever more apparent, such an understanding of modern societies is the necessary precondition for identifying the defining features of globalization. Yet, for the most part, the history of the social sciences did not produce research agendas, theories, and methods designed to grasp complexity, contingency, and contradiction as core dimensions of modern social life that continually reinforce each other. The social sciences did not evolve as ongoing efforts to grasp the gravity each dimension exerts on concrete forms of political, economic, and cultural life, and how the force of each depends on the constant exchange of energy with the other two. To the extent that scrutinizing the impact of globalization on the future – find possible futures – of human civilization is the primary challenge for social scientists to confront today, the current condition presents a unique, and perhaps most unusual opportunity to conceive anew the promise of each and all the social sciences, as elucidating how the complex, contingent, and contradictory nature of modern societies, in the name of advancing social justice, has engendered a regime of managing “social problems.”

The purpose of the work is to determine the basic principles of “conflict-free” development of socio-economic systems.

The theoretical and methodological platform for the research includes the principles of crisis management of economic systems, proclaimed within the theory of economic cycles and the theory of economic growth – the principle of risk insurance, the principles of closed economy, the principles of post-crisis innovational development, and the principle of foundation on the real sector of economy. The author substantiates non-applicability of these principles to “conflict-free” socio-economic systems and determines the basic principles of “conflict-free” development of socio-economic systems, which differ from the existing principles of crisis management of economic systems. For this, the method of modeling of socio-economic processes and systems and the method of formalization are used.

As a result of the research, the basic principles of “conflict-free” development of socio-economic systems are offered – the principle of self-regulation of socio-economic system, the principle of sustainability, the principle of stability, the principle of balance, the principle of systemic management of conflicts, and the principle of moderate openness. Due to these principles, contrary to crisis management, “conflict-free” development remains accessible for any modern socio-economic systems.

The offered principles allowed determining the landmarks of development of modern socio-economic systems that strive for “conflict-free” character. Based on these principles, it is possible to develop a fundamental platform for studying “conflict-free” socio-economic systems.

The purpose of this chapter is to develop a framework strategy for implementing the optimization model of information economy in modern Russia, aimed at its adaptation to the peculiarities of the Russian economic practice.

The methods of induction, deduction, synthesis, and systemic analysis are used, as along with goal-oriented approaches, such as the method of modeling of socio-economic systems, and the method of formalization.

The authors develop the framework strategy of implementing the optimization model of information economy in modern Russia that takes into account specifics of socio-economic development and informatization of the Russian economic system at the modern stage. This strategy differs from the strategy of formation of an information economy implemented in modern Russia. The most important difference is a wide and comprehensive balance, while the Russian economy is tolerant toward imbalance. The offered strategy allows refusing from copying economic practice implemented by other countries and determining own path of formation and development of information economy. This envisages the Russian treatment of the principles of implementing the innovational model of a well-balanced information economy. This treatment is based on the current possibilities of the Russian economy and on the set goal within the formation of an information economy. Due to this, the possibilities and needs of strategic development of information economy in modern Russia are balanced.

The developed framework strategy of implementing the optimization model of information economy in modern Russia is recommended for usage in the domestic economic practice.

The purpose of this chapter is to study the correlation of evolutional and revolutionary transformations in a socio-economic system in the conditions of the formation of an information economy by taking the example of modern Russia.

To distinguish these transformations by studying the information economy, based on the materials of reports and recommendations of the OECD and the World Bank, the indicators that show macro-economic transformations in a socio-economic system in the conditions of formation of an information economy and their control values that correspond to evolutional and revolutionary changes were determined. During the research, the authors used the method of comparative analysis for comparing the values of the indicators in modern Russia with the control values of the indicators that show macro-economic transformations in the socio-economic system in the conditions of the formation of an information economy and classify the corresponding transformations as evolutional and revolutionary. The information and analytical basis includes the materials of the reports of the Higher School of Economics, the OECD, the World Bank, the International Telecommunication Union, the World Wide Web Foundation, the Digital single market, the INSEAD, the WIPO, and the Cornell University.

As a result, it is concluded that the planned transformations in a socio-economic system in the conditions of formation of information economy by implementating the optimization model of this process have an evolutional characteristic. Herein, certain transformations have a revolutionary nature.

The authors determine that the largest revolutionary transformations are due for 2022–2025. However, their classification is caused not by high rate of growth of the indicators’ values but by their achievement of control values. Therefore, the largest socio-economic shifts in the economic system in the modern Russia due to the formation of an information economy will take place in 2019–2022. Hence, in this period, an anti-crisis management of this process should be conducted.

The purpose of the chapter is to study dynamics of development of economic conflicts and to develop a conceptual model of conflict of socio-economic system as an analog to the model of economic cycle.

The author compiles and analyzes the existing conceptual static model of conflict of a socio-economic system. The theoretical basis of the research includes the works of modern authors that reflect provisions of the theory of cycles and devoted to cyclic fluctuations of socio-economic systems. The methodology of the chapter includes the method of dynamic modeling of the process of development of socio-economic systems and the method of formalization (graphic presentation of the obtained results and conclusions). Also, the author uses the complex of general scientific methods within the systemic approach – induction, deduction, analysis, and synthesis.

It is substantiated that the existing conceptual static model of economic conflict, which treats it as a non-recurrent phenomenon in socio-economic system, contradicts its dynamic nature. Instead of this, similarly to the model of economic cycle, a conceptual dynamic model of conflict of socio-economic system is developed, which treats economic conflict as a process that develops according to a certain algorithm and is constantly repeated.

The offered conceptual model of conflict of a socio-economic system as an analogue of the model of economic cycle allows specifying the methodology of studying economic crises, which are manifestations/examples of economic conflicts. This model emphasizes the dichotomic nature of economic conflict (its probable negative or positive consequences), which allows for more precise treatment of economic crisis – which is usually considered to be a negative phenomenon. According to the offered model, crisis is not a phase of economic cycle but socio-economic process that is characterized by cyclic fluctuations. As is expected, the developed model will allow describing the practice of development of modern socio-economic systems with higher precision.

The purpose of this chapter is to determine the main stages in the formation of information economy.

The authors use the method of noosphere research, a bifurcation approach to studying dynamic systems, which is related to systemic approach, the method of structural and functional analysis, the method of dialectical materialism, and the methodology of the institutional economic theory, abstraction, and formalization.

As a result of complex application of totality of the aforementioned methods and approaches to study the formation of information economy, the authors determine the essence and the main stages of information economy: formation of technosphere (technological foundation), formation of sociosphere (social core), and formation of economic sphere (economic pinnacle). At each of these stages, economic system faces serious socioeconomic changes that first face opposition from society and business, but then – with accumulation of practical experience – are accepted, opening the possibility for transition to the next stage of this process.

The authors conclude that while the influence of the global financial crisis in the early twenty-first century is common for all modern economic systems, it stimulated them to begin the formation of information economy. Furthermore, socioeconomic changes that followed this phenomenon are diverse and are largely predetermined by the context such as readiness of economic systems for continuation of their evolution, their reaction to crisis, susceptibility to changes, and other national peculiarities. That’s why the speed of passing the various stages in different economic systems varies.

The purpose of the chapter is to compare social and economic effects that accompany crises of economic systems.

According to the adopted classification of causes of conflicts of socio-economic systems, the indicators that reflect potential social and economic causes of crisis are determined. Regression analysis is performed, and multiple regression dependence of economic growth of Russia’s economic system (values of growth of GDP in constant prices) on the indicators that characterize social and economic causes of crisis is determined; correlation analysis is performed and correlation of each indicator of causes and the indicator of economic growth is determined.

It is shown by the example of modern Russia that subjective (social factors) have the key role in determining cyclic fluctuations of economic system – together with objective (economic effects). Social causes of crisis are almost as important as economic causes. In view of generally acknowledged social consequences of crises (growth of inflation and unemployment level), it is possible to state a relatively equal role of economic and social effects that accompany crises of economic systems. The information and empirical basis of the chapter consists of the statistical materials of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the OECD. The research is performed by the example of modern Russia’s economic system; its timeframe covers 1999–2018 (recent 20 years).

The obtained conclusions show the necessity and open perspectives for specifying the existing theory of cycles in the aspect of inclusion of social effects into the model of cyclic (wave) fluctuations of economic systems.