National pension systems in EurAsEC countries differ significantly in their structure, pension age and social taxes. At the same time, dramatically increasing migration flows raise the issue of proper coordination of various schemes and portability of pension rights. The current study gives an overview of the existing law regulations and identifies two major schemes of portability — geographical and proportional. Geographical portability established in 1992 calculates the pension provision according to the laws of the country of residence. It prevails in EurAsEC and regulates the relations between Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. It does rather poor taking into account unequal migration flows, multi-pillar and heterogeneous pension systems. Proportional portability established in 2007 regulates the relation between Russia and Belorussia and calculates pension provision according to the laws of the country where a pensioner worked. It has been used in the European Union for decades and ensures effectively from labor mobility loses. The study puts a strong argument in favor of proportional system and emphasizes the need of expanding its regulatory power for all EurAsEC countries.
Though the crisis of industrial capitalism and Fordism-Taylorism did not necessarily signify «the end of labour», it still marked its profound transformation. Above all, it affected the space–time characteristics of production, i.e. the space of labour went beyond the walls of factories. The boundary between working time and leisure time became blurred. In modernity, labour was considered a guarantee of redemption. This raises the question of what scenario of the “Economy of Salvation” can society offer to the proletariat, now replaced by the precariat, in a context of fewer jobs or when the job itself has changed. The ambivalence of leisure time now means that it is beneficial both for the worker and for leisure industries. During leisure time, the worker not only rests and recuperates, but also perfects existing skills and gains new ones, develops his/her social networks, indulges in his/her hobbies and passions. In other words, one should be completely emancipated from work, yet while being emancipated the person can continue to form his/her own subjectivity, becoming potentially more valuable for the labour market. Thus we can see that leisure time itself can turn out to be productive. Global changes in the nature of labour and leisure have caused deep social metamorphosis in Russia by way of political regime change. In this “new world”, former civil, economic and professional identities yield to stratification by habitus – everyday, consumer and cultural practices. However, will humanity be able to continue its development on the basis of leisure, not labour? Could network solidarity potentially be nourished by some kind of “livelihood allowance” or by alternative economic and ecological micro-projects, and thus be considered simply as a marginal pastime or the basis of tomorrow's polis and oikos? Western politicians regularly promise re-industrialization, while their Russian colleagues argue for the turn from raw-material to high-tech economics. What future does the barometer of cultural practices show? This is the problematic of our research team "'Cognitive capitalism' through the prism of cultural practices and discourses (comparative approach)" carried out within The National Research University Higher School of Economics’ Academic Fund Program in 2013, grant No 13-05-0013.
How do some firms achieve superior performance and others fail? Much research has been devoted to this question in management, economic theory, and sociology. Nevertheless, due to the absence of a universal approach for conceptualizing firm success and differences in methodological assumptions, numerous studies have produced divergent findings. This has led to continuous debates on the meaning of market success, performance indicators, and measurement techniques. First, this paper addresses conceptual problems with application of the term “effectiveness” and analyzes the potential and limitations of an alternative construct―“performance.” In addition, we attempt to systematize current theoretical implications in the field of strategic management and sociological theories of organization. We focus on strategic management because performance-related questions are central in this academic discipline. Contrary to their intellectual ancestors in industrial economics, strategists pay closer attention to firm-level internal factors affecting firm performance. This paper examines two concepts central to strategic management: firms’ strategies and resources. We analyze strategic choice theory and contingency theory first, then turn our focus to core notions for a resource-based view—a dominant framework in strategy research. This article also addresses a sociological approach to the interpretation of firms’ high performance. A sociological understanding of the mechanisms behind performance variety concentrates on external factors (environmental effects). Firm survival and successful adaptation practices are studied in network, ecological, and institutional traditions in sociology. Finally, we discuss methodological challenges in performance research that require a combination of theoretical implications from both fields. In order to build an adequate theory about sources of performance variance, one should include micro- and macro-indicators and explore synergetic effects.
The aim of the paper is to reveal the main factors affecting the choice of food products, and the analysis of behaviour of food consumers. A standardized survey of adult population was conducted in Moscow and Tumen. The analysis of the database (sample comprises 540 people) allowed to define four types of consumers: conservative, wasteful, impulsive and inconsistent. The obtained results demonstrate that people are able to switch between these types of consumption.