Report for the Global Policy Forum ‘The Modern State: Standards of Democracy and Criteria of Efficiency’, Yaroslavl, Russia, 9–10 September 2010.

Introduction. Modernizing Russia: The Context

‘Despite many currents and cross currents, continuity is perhaps the most impressive phenomenon in the history of economic doctrines.’1 These words by a very experienced economic historian are still extremely relevant, also for economic policy. But continuity in economics is of a peculiar and cyclical kind. It does not manifest itself in smooth incremental transitions, but rather in the recurrence of similar sets of ideas in similar contexts over time.

The economics profession and what is considered ‘best practice’ economic policy is, then, decidedly cyclical. Its cyclicality appears to follow the same type of mechanisms of ‘destabilizing stability’ described by US economist Hyman Minsky as leading up to financial crises. In the financial sector, when things are stable and improving over long periods of time, bank routines of risk evaluation grow increasingly lax, and in the end credit is given to people who are not even able to pay interest on the loans they are given (‘Ponzi financing’, as with subprime loans). In other words, long periods of stability lead to increasing vulnerability: to Minsky's ‘destabilizing stability’.

Similar cycles are at work as regards our understanding of economics and industrial policy: long periods of economic progress in the core countries lead to increasingly abstract and irrelevant economic theories. ‘Bad’ theories – particularly as they are applied outside the economic core – are allowed to dominate the discipline for long periods of time because the underlying economy is strong enough to withstand their poisonous influences, but, eventually, reality catches up and disaster ensues. This brings less abstract and more relevant economic theories and practices back; mindless laissez-faire is abandoned and more active economic governance again becomes acceptable. These turning-points can, after their most famous manifestation, be referred to as ‘1848 moments’, and they tend to be caused by economic crises, just as the 1848 turning point followed upon the severe financial crisis of 1847.