2008,,,,, 100009, 100009 20 80 Sachs 1992 1999 2000 I., Gaidar 1992) E.Yasin 200 2008JYJ015 78
1994 1992-199 1995 Rawski Nolanand Ash Caiand Li 2002 Stiglitz 1998 200 5 100 199 2000 1 2000 80, 2 [1] 1993 2003 10 17 1. 1992 11 79
2008 10 99% 70% 90 2. 1992 1 2 80% 90% 2000, 30 20 1 20 80 2002 13% 199 142.5 200 383.8, 199 3.4% 200 80.5% ( ) 1992 72071 2005 94 1405 3575, 19.5% 53.4% 90 1992.4 200 1993 14.7 840 1994 24.1 320 1 1995 17.1 231 1992-2007 ( :%) 199 8.3 218 1997 2.8 110 1998-0.8 84.4 1999-1.4 3. 2008 Институт экономики РАН: Переход к рыночной экономике (1992-2000),Москва,2002,стр.11 Россия в цифрах 2007,Краткий статистический сборник.m.москва,2008,р.397. www//http:gks.ru 3. - 2000 0.4 20.2 200-4. 1978 80 90 1991 2001 0.7 18. 2002-0.8 15.1 2003 1.2 12.0 2004 3.9 11.7 2005 1.8 10.9 200 1.5 8.9 2007 4.8 11.9 80
ÁÂÃÄÁÂÃÁÂÃÅÁÂÃÆÁÂÃÇÁÂÃÈÁÂÃÉÁÂÃÁÂÃÁÂÃÂÁÂÄÁÂÁÂÅÁÂÆÁÂÇÁÂÈÁÂÉÁÂÁÂÃÁÂÅÄÅÄÁÅÄÅÄÆÅÄÇÅÄÈÅÄÉÅÄ 30 20 1979 90 10% 1994 1 1 1999 V 2000 3 199 12 1 90 1978 27 200 4 199 1 2004 2007 9 1980-2005 11.3% 2000-2005 1.8% 200 20% 1. 1991-2000 -1.7% 2001-2005 2.9%200 3.4% [2] 3 1980-2007 * (%) :,2008 ; ; 34 35 12 409 41 IMF,WEO Database,Table A4 * 1991 2. 2007 255 13 GDP 4 GDP GDP, 1978 178 GDP 1990 85 81
2008 4 1992-2007 GDP (%) Á Á Á 2008 Россия в цифрах, 2007, www//http:gks.ru 2000 1720 2000 GDP 200 GDP 7000 1 1 1990 GDP 2000 30% 200 1999-2005 GDP 70% 2000 500% 200% GDP 3 3. 2 5 2000-200 (%) 2007.Россия в цифрах,2007.москва,2007;http//:www.gks.ru/pupr/. 82
2000 83 5 3 2 GDP (%) 1990 34.7 30.1* 23.4 1997 38.2 22.8 22.9 2000 3.1 1. 22.5 2002 40.3 20.2 20.7 2004 42.0 21.3 n 200 48.0 23.2 n : * 2,, Marshall(1920), Prescott Visscher (1980),,Hopenhayn 20 80 90 Rogerson(1993) Jovanovic(1982),Atkeson and Kehoe(1997), 3 2000 200 (%) GDP% 2000 200 35.3 15.1 42. 17.0 2.3 2.9 49.9.5 2.4 22.0 7.5 1.5 :,2008 Россия в цифрах 2007 Москва,2008 www//http economy.gov.ru/ 83
2008, : u(c t,l t )=lnc t +χl t (1) 1 c l χ 1 n t =1-l t y= Af(k,n,h) υ θ 1-θ-υ y t =Af(k t,n t,h t )=Ah t kt nt,0<v,θ<1 2 k t+1 =K t (1-δ)+I t 3 Ι δ k t = y t -c t +k t-1 (1-δ) h t+1 =φ(h,h t )=B(H)+G(h t ) 4 H B(H) B 觶 t =ψ B -B H 0 H 觶 t 5 B t B H h 0 B H B 0 h w h 0 <h w ψ 5 g 0 =g w B B H = H 1+[(B H /B 0 )-1]e -ψh g t >g w B H S 4 2003 h t =(1+exp(-αt)) -1 h w +exp(-αt)h 0 7 α 0 燮 α 燮 1 α=0 α 84
7 2 1 h w =2,h 0 =1 v α 7 8 7-8 80 90 1. 7 0 90 1. 1992-2007 1 1992-1999 15 1999-2007 3.5 2. 8 20-85
2008 90 1/, 1, / GDP 2000 0.3% 2005 0.0% [3], [4] 30 1 2002 G8 WTO 70% 50 2 2007 3 2030 GDP 2., 8
1993 20 21 [5] О. 2., [],, 3. 1., 87
2008 [1] 2007 52 [2] IMF [3] Вестник,2005,12,14 [4],2007,10,8,1 [14]Hoff.K,J. E. Stiglitz,2002, After the Big Bang? Obstacles to the Emergence of the Rule of Law in Post-Communist Societies, [5] 21 Working Paper 9282, NBER. http://finance.sina.com.cn 2001 07 13 12:44 [15]Dabrowski.M, S. Gomulka and J.Rostowski,2000, []О.белокрылова: Теория переходной экономики, Whence Reform? A Critique of the Stiglitz Perspective, working Ростов-на-Дону Феникс,2002,Стр.29. to a Market Economy: Pitfalls of Partial Reform, Quarterly Journal [1] of Economics,107:889-90. 2003 5 [17]Roland. G and T. Verdier, 1999, Transition and the Output Fall,Economics of Transition,7(1):1-28. [2], 1993 1 [18]Rosati. D, 1994, Output Decline During Transition from [3] Plan to Market, Economics of Transition, 2(4): 419-442. 2002 [19]Krugman, Paul, 1990, Rethinking International Trade, [4] MIT Press. 2004 [20]McMillan, J., and Naughton,B.,(1992), How to Reform a [5] planned Economy: Lessons from China, Oxford Review of Economic 2000 Policy, vol. 8, No.1. [] [21]Kornai. J.(2000), what the change of system from socialism to capitalism Does and Does. Not mean. Journal of Economic 2002 [7] Perspective, Vol4. No.1 2004 [22]David Owen and David O.Robinson (2003). Russia re [8], bounds,imf.washington D.C., 2000 4 5 [23]Russian Academy of sciences institute for international e- [9] conomic and political studies (2001), Post-socialist countries in the 2002 globalizing world, Moscow,Gala-Glafix. [10].W. : 2000 [11]. 200 [12].C. 21, 2003 [13] Б.Н.,М.Л. 2050 : -, 2007 paper, Centre for Economic Performance London School of Economics and Political Science [1]Murphy.K, A.Shleifer and R.Vishny, 1992, The Transition Transitional Means and Economic Growth a Comparative Study of Chinese and Russian Economic Transition and Economic Growth Lin Yueqin Liu Xiahui Abstract: T he paper, by constructing a model of economic growth, analyzes Russian and Chinese transitional means, modes and performance. The analysis indicates that though transitional modes influence the growth at the beginning of transition to some extent they are the most essential determinant of transitional performance. Any of these modes is not superior to the others; moreover, as far as both countries still in the transitional process are concerned, sustaining economic growth and welfare improvement demand to take reform further. Keywords: economic transition; transitional means; performance 88