Editorial Board

Aleksey Vedev – Doctor of Economic Sciences, Head of the Center for Structural Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Vladimir Glinskiy – Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor of the Chair of Statistics, Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management (NSUEM-NINH)

Sergey Drobyshevsky – Doctor of Economic Sciences, Scientific Director of the Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy

Anna Zolotareva – Candidate of Legal Sciences, Head of the Center for Legal Sciences, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy

Pavel Kadochnikov – Candidate of Economic Sciences, Deputy Finance Minister of the Russian Federation

Vyacheslav Morgunov – Doctor of Economic Sciences, Leading Researcher of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Alexander Pogorletskiy – Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor of the Chair of World Economy, Department of Economics, St. Petersburg State University

Alexander Radygin – Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Chairman of the Scientific Council, Head of the Center for Institutional Development, Ownership and Corporate Governance, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy

Sergey Sinelnikov-Murylev – Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Academic Director of the Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy

Irina Starodubrovskaya – Candidate of Economic Sciences, Head of the Center for Political Economy and Regional Development, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy

For subscribers

The journal is available in print and electronic form (delivered to the subscriber's e-mail address).

Print edition

You may subscribe to the Russian Economic Developments journal at any post office, subscription index 45509 in the Pressa Rossii unified catalogue via the Kniga-Service Agency.

Electronic edition

ВSubscription to the electronic edition (in PDF format) is available at the editorial office.

The monthly subscription cost is 250 roubles (both print and electronic editions).

Publishing Ethics

The journal "Russian Economic Development" and its founder and publisher, the Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy Foundation, support the policy aimed at compliance with the principles of publishing ethics, and recognize that monitoring compliance with the principles of publishing (editorial) ethics is one of the main components of reviewing and publishing. 

1. The Principles of professional ethics to govern the publisher's practices

As part of its practices, the publisher shall bear responsibility for making public the works created by authors, which shall entail the necessity to comply with the following fundamental principles and procedures:

1.1. To promote the compliance of the editorial staff, the editing and publishing group, the editorial board, the reviewers and the authors with their ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements.

1.2. To aid the journal's editorial staff in dealing with complaints concerning the ethical issues arising in connection with the published materials, and help them in their interaction with other journals and/or publishers, if this conduces to the performance of their duties by the editors.

1.3. To be always prepared to publish corrections, explanations, retractions and apologies, whenever necessary.

1.4. To provide the journal's editorial staff with the possibility to prevent publications that may constitute plagiarism or contain invalid data.

1.5. The publisher (or editor-in-chief) may reject a manuscript or demand that the author should correct it, if the latter has been prepared with violations of the manuscript preparation rules established by the journal.

1.6. The authors of the works published in the journal shall retain full ownership rights thereto. Nobody may use these works without a preliminary notification of and permission granted by the author.

1.7. Each manuscript received for publication / reviewing shall be treated as a confidential document. It shall not be shown to and discussed with other persons, with the exception of persons empowered to do so by the editor.

1.8. To place information concerning financial support of a study, if the author includes such information in their paper.

1.9. On having identified any contentual, grammatical, stylistic and other errors, the editorial staff shall be obliged to make every effort to correct such errors.

1.10. To coordinate with the author the editorial alterations and corrections.

1.11. Not to delay the journal's issues.

2. The Principles of professional ethics to govern the editor-in-chief's practices

In the framework of their activity, the editor-in-chief shall bear responsibility for making public the authors' works, which shall entail the necessity to comply with the following fundamental principles:

2.1. A decision concerning publication must be based on a solid judgment as to the incontestable reliability of the submitted data and the scientific significance of the submitted work.

2.2. To assess the intellectual content of a manuscript irrespectively of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of its author(s).

2.3. The unpublished data submitted as part of a manuscript must not be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without a written consent of the author. The information or ideas received in the course of editing and associated with potential advantages must remain confidential and may not be used for the purpose of deriving personal benefits.

2.4. Not to allow the publication of information if there is sufficient grounds to believe that it constitutes plagiarism.

2.5. The editor-in-chief, in the course of their activity, shall be obliged:

– to constantly improve the journal;

– to follow the principle of freedom of opinion;

– to strive to satisfy the needs of the journal's readers and authors;

– to never be influenced by business or political interests;

– to be guided, when making decisions concerning the publication of submitted materials, by the following fundamental criteria: the relevance of the manuscript to the journal's scope; the relevance, newness, and scientific significance of the submitted article; clarity of language; reliability of the results and proper formulation of the conclusions. The quality and relevance of a study shall provide the foundation for the decision concerning publication;

– to implement reasonable measures in order to ensure high quality of published materials and protect the confidentiality of personal information;

– to give consideration to recommendations offered by the reviewers when making a final decision concerning the publication of an article. The responsibility for the publication decision shall be borne exclusively by the journal's editorial board;

– to properly substantiate their decision in an event of their acceptance or rejection of an article;

– to provide the author(s) of the material being reviewed with an opportunity to substantiate their researcher viewpoint;

– when the composition of the editorial board has been changed, not to overturn the decisions concerning publication of materials made by the previous editorial board.

2.6. The editor-in-chief, together with the publisher, must not fail to provide an answer to any protests of claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials.

3. The ethical principles to govern the reviewer's practices

The reviewer shall conduct scientific expert's estimation of the materials submitted by authors, and so shall act in an unbiased manner, which shall entail the implementation of the following principles:

3.1. The manuscript accepted for reviewing must be treated as a confidential document that may not be handed over for the purpose of informing or being discussed by third parties, unless the latter have been granted powers to do so by the editorial staff.

3.2. The reviewer is obliged to provide an objective and well-substantiated estimation of the stated results of a study and to offer clearly substantiated recommendations. No personal criticism of the author is allowed.

3.3. The comments and recommendations of the reviewer must be objective and relevant, their goal being to improve the scientific value of a manuscript.

3.4. The unpublished information contained in a submitted article may not be used by the reviewer in his or her own professional work without a written permission by its author. The confidential information or ideas obtained in the course of reviewing shall be kept secret and must not be used for the purpose of deriving personal benefits.

4. The ethical principles to govern the practices of the author of a scientific publication

The author (or group of authors), when submittingе materials to a scientific journal, shall be aware that they bear primary responsibility for the newness and reliability of the results of their scientific study, which shall entail compliance with the following principles:

4.1. To submit reliable results of completed studies. No deliberately erroneous or falsified assumptions can be acceptable.

4.2. To guarantee that the study results as stated in the manuscript are original. In the event of having borrowed certain fragments or statements, references should be made to the publications that have influenced the content of the work in question.

4.3 All the persons that have made significant individual research contributions must be named as co-authors. If any person has participated in any significant part of the project, that participation should be acknowledged, or they should be listed among the authors.

4.4. To bear responsibility for the fact that a given work is published for the first time, and not to allow duplication. If any fragments of previous studies are mentioned, a reference to an earlier publication is necessary, with a statement as to how it differs from the new one.

4.5. Not to submit to the journal the manuscript that has been submitted to another journal and is being considered there, or to submit an article that has already been published in another journal.

4.6. To comply with ethical norms when voicing criticism or comments concerning the studies conducted by third parties.

4.7. When discovering a significant error or inaccuracy in the published article, to urgently notify the journal's editor-in-chief thereof, and to cooperate with the editor-in-chief in order to publish a refutation or correction with regard to that article.

5. Confidentiality and objectivity

Each manuscript accepted for reviewing must be treated as a confidential document. It may not be shown to or discussed with other persons, unless the latter have been granted powers to do so by the editor-in-chief. The reviews must be done objectively. The reviewer must state their viewpoint clearly and provide proper substantiation thereto.

6. Originality and plagiarism

The author of an article must guarantee that they have written an entirely original work, and in case the author has made use of the work by and/or quotations from other authors, a proper reference should be included, or this fact should be mentioned in the text.

7. Authorship

The authorship shall be restricted to those persons who have made substantial contribution to the concept, planning, implementation or interpretation of the described study.

8. Information disclosure and conflict of interests

All the authors shall disclose, in their manuscript, the existence of a financial or other significant conflict of interests that could be interpreted as capable of influencing the results of their manuscript's estimation. All the project funding sources must be disclosed.

9. Participation in investigations of ethics violations

In the event of ethical claims in regard to the manuscript reviewed or materials published, the editorial staff together with the publisher shall resort to proper measures, which in a general case shall involve interacting with the author(s) of a relevant manuscript and considering the submitted complaint or request, but may also involve interacting with relevant organizations and research centers.

10. Requirements to manuscripts

The author of an article describing an original study must submit the reliable results thereof, as well as an objective discussion of that study. The data reported as the basis of a study must not contain errors. The article must provide sufficient details and bibliographical references for possible future citations. False or deliberately erroneous statements shall be treated as unethical conduct, and shall be inacceptable.

All overviews and articles expressing professional opinions must likewise be accurate and objective. Any articles expressing the opinions of the editorial staff must be clearly identified as such.

11. Multiple, redundant, and simultaneous publications

In a general case, the author must not publish a manuscript describing essentially one and the same study in more than one scientific journal intended for publishing original studies. The submission of one and the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal shall be treated as unethical conduct, and shall be inacceptable.

12. Recognition of sources

The contributions to the submitted work made by other persons must always be explicitly recognized. The author must provide references to those publications that have significantly influenced the character of the submitted work. No information received privately, e. g. during a conversation, through correspondence or in the course of discussion with third parties must be made use of, or reproduced, without an explicitly expressed written permission obtained from its primary source. No information obtained in the course of rendering confidential services must be made use of without an explicit written permission by the author of the study conducted as part of rendering the said confidential services.

13. Significant errors in publications

In an event of discovery of significant errors or inaccuracies in their publication, the author must notify thereof the editor or publisher, and cooperate with them in order to promptly stop the publication or rectify the errors. If the editor or publisher has received information from third parties that a publication contains significant errors, the author shall be obliged to withdraw the article or to rectify the errors within the shortest time.

14. Procedure for settling situations associated with violation of publishing ethics

14.1. Identification of unethical conduct

14.1.1. Unethical conduct may be revealed, and the editor-in-chief or publisher be informed thereof, by any person at any time.

14.1.2. In order to launch a violation investigation, the person informing the editor-in-chief or publisher of a violation of ethics, must provide sufficient information and proof thereof. Each application shall be considered in a uniform procedure, and with regard to each application a final decision or conclusion shall be issued.

14.2. Investigation

14.2.1. The initial decision concerning the conduct of an investigation shall be made by the editor-in-chief who may, whenever necessary, consult the publisher.

14.2.2. During an investigation, all the necessary data must be collected, while at the same time no information thereof may be spread beyond the persons involved in the investigation.

14.3. Insignificant violations

Insignificant violations may be investigated without involving a broader range of persons. In any event, the author must be provided with an opportunity to respond to any suspicions or accusations.

14.4. Serious violations

Serious violations may require that the employer of the person accused of a violation of ethics be notified thereof. The editor-in-chief, after studying on their own the available data, or after additional consultations with a limited range of experts, and requesting whenever necessary that help be provided by the publisher, must make the decision concerning the feasibility of informing thereof the author's employer.

14.4. Sanctions

Sanctions (their severity increasing as follows) may be applied either separately or in a variety of combinations:

14.4.1. A warning letter, issued to the author or reviewer notifying them of the fact of an ethics violation and warning them of the possible consequences.

14.4.2. An official publication on the journal's website of the investigated facts of unethical conduct.

14.4.3. A publication of the editor's note with a detailed description of the committed violation of ethical standards.

14.4.4. An official letter sent to the head of the organization where the author or reviewer are employed, or the organization that funded their studies.

14.4.5. An official cancellation of the article's publication in the journal, with a simultaneous notification thereof of the head of the organization or department where the author or reviewer are employed, the international scientific indexing services, and the journal's readers.

14.4.6. An official ban on the publication of works submitted by a given author, or on the hiring of services of a given reviewer, for an established period of time.

14.4.7. A notification of the committed violation of the professional organization where the violator is a member, as well as of the state supervisory and regulatory agencies for the purpose of further investigation of that case and imposition of appropriate measures.


Gaidar Insitute for Economic Policy

125993, Russia, Moscow, Gazetnyi per. 3-5, building 1,

phone: +7 (495) 629-67-36, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , Internet: http://www.iep.ru.

Send your articles at: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Editorial policy for submission, peer review and publication of papers submitted to the editorial office of the journal Economic Development of Russia

1.All research papers submitted to the editorial office are subject to mandatory peer review.

2.Editorial Board will check the manuscript on compliance with the journal’s mission, format requirements, then register and send for peer review to a subject matter expert (doctor or candidate of science) with subject matter publications over recent three years. 

3.Dates of refereeing are determined taking account prompt publication of the manuscript.

4.Review highlights the following issues: 

- relevance of the paper’s content to its topic;

- topic novel, original;

- validity and in-depth analysis of the problem;

- in line with state-of-the-art knowledge;

- information value;

- academic entirety, clear and well organized presentation;

- methodology relevance to research tasks;

- conclusions validity;

- practical implications.

5.Organization employing reviewer will attest the review according to its procedures.

6.Review is confidential. The author of refereed article will be able to read the review. Confidentiality can be breached solely when the reviewer states unreliability of falsity of the data embedded in the text. 

7.Where reviewers recommend to undertake a substantial revision of the manuscript, the latter is send to the author coupled with the text of the review with an invitation to address all comments and concerns when undertaking a revision or confute the arguments (in total or partly).

8.Revised manuscript will be sent for another review. In this case, the date of submission will be the date the editorial staff receives the revised manuscript.

9.When the article on reviewer’s recommendations has undergone major revision, it will be sent back to the original reviewer who provided critical comments.

10. Where the author disagrees with the reviewer, the former has the right to submit point-by-point response to the editorial staff of the journal. The article can be sent for another review or for consideration by the Editorial Board.

11. Editorial staff retains the right to reject the manuscript in the event of failure or unwillingness of the author to consider editors’ recommendations.

12. In the event manuscript is rejected, editorial staff sends substantiated response to the author. 

13. Where there are negative reviews from two different reviewers or one negative review on a revised manuscript, the letter is rejected without refereeing by other members of the Editorial Board.

14. Manuscript rejected outright is not accepted for another review. 

15. Editorial Board decides on publication which is registered in its meeting’s minutes. 

16. Once accepted for publication, the author will be informed of the decision and of the publication dates. Review will be e-mailed, faxed or posted to author. 

17. Refereeing maximum period, the term between manuscript submission to editorial office and editors’ decision, comes to two months.

18. Editorial Board of the journal provides reviews on request from the author and on request from the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. 

19. Original reviews are kept by editorial staff of the journal during five years. 

Editor in Chief “Economic Development of Russia”                     / Vedev А.L. /


ISSN 2306-5001

Официальный сайт журнала "Экономическое развитие России"


E-mail address: p This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Founder: RuScience LLC



File Title: REFERENCES-2017 (Details)
File Type: pdf
File Size: 499.29 Kb

File Title: REFERENCES-2016 (Details)
File Type: pdf
File Size: 583.13 Kb

File Title: REFERENCES-2015 (Details)
File Type: pdf
File Size: 860.63 Kb

File Title: REFERENCES-2014 (Details)
File Type: pdf
File Size: 489.89 Kb

File Title: REFERENCES-2013 (Details)
File Type: pdf
File Size: 546.88 Kb

File Title: REFERENCES-2012 (Details)
File Type: pdf
File Size: 408.87 Kb




The article submitted for publication must be thematically relevant and innovative in its content, reflect the statement of thesubject (or problem), contain a description of the main results of the research, conclusions, and also comply with the design rules defined by the Editorial Board.

The author is responsible for the scientific and theoretical level of the published material.

For any information concerning the publication of research papers, please call +7 (903) 263-98-31.

Submit your research papers in electronic format to the following email address: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Preparing a manuscript

When preparing a manuscript, we recommend that the following basic parameters should be followed:

format: Microsoft Word document;

font: Times New Roman;

font size: point 14;

line spacing: 1,5;

text alignment: justified;

all margins: 20 mm;

centered headlines: with left and right indents;

text and headlines color: black;

the first line of each paragraph should have an indent (click Format and then, in the Paragraph group, click First line - Indentation). Do not use the Space or Tab keys to indent paragraphs.


The title of a research paper should reveal its content, may not be generalizing, and should not exceed one line.

The volume of a research paper

The volume of a full-length research paper must be no less than 7,000 characters (including spaces) excluding illustrations (tables and graphs). The maximum permitted volume is 30,000 characters (including spaces).



Tables should be created by the standard tools offered by Microsoft Word (in the Table menu). Each element in a table should be placed inside a separate table cell (do not split the table lines by using paragraph marks). Horizontal alignment inside the table cells should be achieved by using appropriate buttons ('Center alignment' or 'Left alignment'); in order to achieve vertical alignment, do not use paragraph marks (better use the default table format). No color should be used in tables! Instead, use Bold or Italic for emphasis.

Graphical illustrations

All tables, graphs and diagrams included with the text should be properly numbered and invariably referred to throughout the text. When the volume of the text is maximum, the combined total number of illustrations should not exceed six.

All illustrations should be submitted in electronic format as separate files. In order to construct diagrams, use Microsoft Excel or Microsoft PowerPoint (each file should contain numerical data corresponding to the relevant illustration). Block diagrams may be constructed using Microsoft Word. Graphic materials may also be created in CorelDraw (do not convert any text to curves, the file should be in .cdr format, its version not higher than CorelDraw 12) or Adobe Illustrator (do not convert the text to curves; the file should be in .ai, .eps format, and its version not higher than CS2). No files in .jpeg, .gif, or .tif format, or any other raster images, will be accepted for publication!

Reference list

Any material submitted for publication should contain a list of references and / or sources of information. The list of references should be formatted in accordance with State Standard 7.0.5-2008: Bibliographic reference.

The information concerning the authors should be submitted, both in Russian and in English, as follows:

- the author's surname, first name, and patronymic (in full),

- the name of the establishment where the author works,

- the author's position, rank, and academic degree,

- personal email address.


The abstract of a research paper or opinion survey should be submitted in the Russian and English languages. In the English-language version, the title of the research paper should be translated into English. The abstract length should be 2,000 - 3,000 characters (Editorial Board including spaces).

The abstract should state the main point of the research paper, the conclusion thereto and the expert assessment of the course of events by the author, with his or her recommendations and suggestions.

The Russian and English versions of the abstract should be submitted as separate files simultaneously with the main text.

An excessive use of introductory phrases (e. g., 'The author of the research paper considers that...') should be avoided.

The key words (collocations) should be provided both in Russian and in English. Their required number is up to ten.

If the the manuscript preparation rules are not followed, the Editorial Board retains the right to suggest that proper corrections be made, or to reject the submitted material.