The paper proposes a critical study focusing on the development of non-government higher education sector in Russia from new institutionalism perspective in economic sociology. Conditions under which private universities spread in other countries are identified. In some countries non-governmental universities successfully complement governmental ones, in some countries private universities displace state universities. Recent research shows that private sector produces some organizational divergences (especially under privatization and emerging liberal markets). However the presented paper argues that Russian case is specific. Governmental and non-governmental universities are initially intertwined. This fact provokes us into thinking about the Russian higher education system from the alternative point of view. Based on in-depth interviews with founders and lecturers from Moscow private universities and the survey of students the paper intends to trace structuration of non-governmental education field and to demonstrate impacts of institutional isomorphism mechanisms on private universities.
Prof. Mizruchi was interviewed by Igor Chirikov, senior research fellow at the National Research University Higher School of Economics in Moscow. In the interview, Prof. Mizruchi was asked about the evolution of his research interests and peculiarities of his approach to teaching organizational theory. Prof. Mizruchi also described how he became acquainted with organizational sociology. Within his winding career trajectory from Statistical Analyst at Albert Einstein College of Medicine to Professor of Sociology at the University of Michigan, Mark Mizruchi has witnessed the development of both organizational theory and sociology of organizations and their division into institutionally separate subfields. Whether such fragmentation is methodologically important, it certainly affects the teaching process of organizational theories to students and the future of the whole field by shifting its research focus from broad and theoretical issues to more narrow and applied problems. In addition, Prof. Mizruchi shared the main ideas of his recent award-winning book (The Fracturing of the American Corporate Elite) and details of the creative writing process. In the final part of the conversation, Prof. Mizruchi told the story of how the Interdisciplinary Committee on Organizational Studies (ICOS) was established and how it influences research and teaching processes at the University of Michigan.
In the interview, Prof. Piketty expressed his skepticism about economists’ tendencies toward using formal models. Early on, he recognized the limits of an economic approach that was applied in ignorance of history. This profoundly affected his future academic career. He admits that his successful research on inequality was possible only in cooperation with other social disciplines.
In addition, Prof. Piketty talked about main ideas of his book Capital in the Twenty-First Century and its
restrictions. In particular, he pointed out that there has been insufficient attention toward economic growth.
In his opinion, in order to explain economic growth, one should take into account historical perspective and
analyze government’s policies toward public education and the health system. The French economist also
noted his intention to reconcile Karl Marx and Pierre Bourdieu’s conflicting views on a relationship between
economic and cultural forms of inequality.
This article provides a review of approaches used to assess the costs of social and economic damage caused by fatalities in road accidents in Russia and other countries. The urgency of the problem is shaped by the high mortality rates of people involved in road crashes in our country compared to other countries. At the moment, absolute and relative numbers of both the car accidents and fatalities in Russia are much higher than in the European Union countries or in Canada and the United States. At the same time, the estimated costs of economic damage from the loss of people’s lives is much lower in Russia than in those other countries. The underestimation of human life value was discussed in details in the previous publication of 2014 [Karabchuk, Nikitina, Remezkova, Soboleva 2014], where we concluded that the cost of human life in Russia is equal to the value of human life in developing countries, despite the positive trend of increases in human capital in recent years in Russia [Kapelyushnikov 2012]. The social and economic consequences of the underestimation of the value of human life can have negative effects on an individual and a country level: the quality of life of Russian citizens can deteriorate and the state would lose economically active population, moreover the people will feel less satisfied with their lives and less happy. Thus, it is important to develop the theoretical and methodological framework for assessing the cost of deaths caused by fatal road accidents in Russia. This article aims to raise the problem of low road safety in Russia and insufficient discussion of its consequences in the scientific literature. Comparative analysis of socio-economic damage estimates in Europe and the methods to assess them will allow us the backed-up methodology of the damage evaluation caused by the road accidents. That in its turn will help to reduce mortality rates through the implementation of the safety road programs. We review the international experience and compare it with the current Russian methodology, after that we summarize the results of comparative analysis and provide recommendations how to improve the methods of socio-economic damage evaluation caused by the car accidents.