Technology and Human Capital in an Economy Under Sanctions
https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2022-6-40-67
Abstract
The article considers an abstract economy which has limited legal opportunities to modernize its technology. As technology and human capital interact, this limitation also impacts educational choices. Economic agents who are expecting a slowdown in technological modernization become less motivated to augment their human capital. Projecting that model onto Russia’s economy under sanctions indicates that the pace will slacken both in technological modernization and in the accumulation of human capital. As it is clearly too early to make predictions in granular detail regarding Russian industries, the article focusses instead on the country’s various regions. The theory of economic complexity is employed to calculate indexes reflecting the sophistication of the more complex regional industries and universities. The correlation between types of economic activity and university specialization at the regional level is also estimated. The conclusion is that regional economies featuring a more fully developed complex manufacturing sector also have a more developed university system as well as a tighter correlation between the structure of the economy and of the higher education system. These regions may be more affected by sanctions because it becomes more difficult for the modern technologies which are intensively used in complex industries to penetrate the Russian economy. To reduce the impact of restrictions on technological development and education, efforts should be made to restore the participation of Russian companies in global technology chains.
About the Author
I. L. Lyubimov
Institute for Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ivan L. Lyubimov, PhD (Econ.), Senior Research Fellow, Center for the Economics of Continuing Education
82, Vernadskogo pr., Moscow, 119571
References
1. Kazakova M. V., Lyubimov I. L., Nesterova K. V. Garantiruet li uspekh otdel’noy reformy uskorenie ekonomicheskogo rosta? Nedostatochno razvitye instituty kak prichina provala reform [Does a Single Reform’s Success Ensure Faster Growth? Weak Institutions as a Cause of Reform Failure]. Ekonomicheskiy zhurnal VShE [HSE Economic Journal], 2016, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 624-654. (In Russ.)
2. Simachev Yu., Fedyunina A., Yurevich M., Kuzyk M., Zudin N., Gorodnyy N. Rossiya na rynkakh peredovogo proizvodstva: doklad k XXII Aprel’skoy mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii po problemam razvitiya ekonomiki i obshchestva [Russia in the Advanced Manufacturing Markets: Presentation at the XXII April International Academic Conference on Economic and Social Development]. Moscow, HSE Publishing House, 2021. (In Russ.)
3. Acemoglu D. It’s Good Jobs, Stupid. Economics for Inclusive Prosperity. Policy Brief no. 13, 2019.
4. Acemoglu D. Search in the Labour Market, Incomplete Contracts and Growth. CEPR Discussion Paper, no. 1026, 1994.
5. Acemoglu D., Aghion Ph., Zilibotti F. Distance to Frontier, Selection and Economic Growth. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2006, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 37-74. DOI:10.1162/jeea.2006.4.1.37.
6. Acemoglu D., Autor D. Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings. In: Card D., Ashenfelter O. (eds.). Handbook of Labor Economics, vol. 4, part B. Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2010, chapter 12, pp. 1043-1171. DOI:0.1016/S0169-7218-(11)02410-5.
7. Balassa B. Trade Liberalization and “Revealed” Comparative Advantage. The Manchester School, 1965, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 99-123. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9957.1965.tb00050.x.
8. Becker G. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1964.
9. Foster-McGregor N., Nomaler O., Verspagen B. Measuring the Creation and Adoption of New Technologies Using Trade and Patent Data. Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology Working Papers, no. 2019-053, 2019.
10. Goldin C., Katz L. The Race between Education and Technology. Cambridge, MA, London, Belknap Press, 2008.
11. Hausmann R., Hidalgo C. A., Bustos S., Coscia M., Chung S., Jimenez J., Simoes A., Yildirim M. A. The Atlas of Economic Complexity: Mapping Paths to Prosperity. Cambridge, MA, Center for International Development at Harvard University and MIT, 2011. DOI:10.7551/mitpress/9647.001.0001.
12. Hidalgo C. Economic Complexity Theory and Applications. Nature Reviews Physics, 2021, no. 3, pp. 92-113. DOI:10.1038/s42254-020-00275-1.
13. Hidalgo C. Why Information Grows: The Evolution of Order, From Atoms to Economies. New York, NY, Basic Books, 2015.
14. Horn D. The Hitler Youth and Education Decline in the Third Reich. History of Education Quarterly, 1976, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 425-447. DOI:10.2307/367724.
15. Krementsov N. Stalinist Science. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press,1997.
16. Redding S. The Low-Skill, Low-Quality Trap: Strategic Complementarities between Human Capital and R&D. Economic Journal, 1996, vol. 106, no. 435, pp. 458-470. DOI: 10.2307/2235260.
17. Rodrik D., Stantcheva S. Fixing Capitalism’s Good Jobs Problem. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 2021, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 824-837. DOI:10.1093/oxrep/grab024.
18. Teixeira A. C., Queirós A. S. Economic Growth, Human Capital and Structural Change: A Dynamic Panel Data Analysis. Research Policy, 2016, vol. 45, no. 8, pp. 1636-1648. DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.006.
19. Sutton A. Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development 1917 to 1930. Stanford, CA, Hoover Institution Press, 1968.
Review
For citations:
Lyubimov I.L. Technology and Human Capital in an Economy Under Sanctions. Economic Policy. 2022;17(6):40-67. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2022-6-40-67
Views:
84
Email this article 