<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ecr-journal</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Экономическая наука современной России</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Economics of Contemporary Russia</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">1609-1442</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2618-8996</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Regional Public Organization for Assistance to the Development of Institutions of the Department of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.33293/1609-1442-2023-3(102)-155-165</article-id><article-id custom-type="edn" pub-id-type="custom">PNCTLA</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">ecr-journal-905</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ФИЛОСОФИЯ ЭКОНОМИКИ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>PHILOSOPHY OF ECONOMICS</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Экономическая модель человека в контексте системного подхода к изучению экономики</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>The Human Economic Model in the Context of a Systematic Approach to the Study of Economics</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3385-3603</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Бирюков</surname><given-names>Виталий Васильевич</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Biryukov</surname><given-names>Vitaly V.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>доктор экономических наук, профессор, профессор кафедры экономики и управления</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">sciencebvv@gmail.com</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Омская гуманитарная академия, Омск</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Omsk Humanitarian Academy, Omsk</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2023</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>30</day><month>09</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>0</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>155</fpage><lpage>165</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Бирюков В.В., 2023</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2023</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Бирюков В.В.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Biryukov V.V.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.ecr-journal.ru/jour/article/view/905">https://www.ecr-journal.ru/jour/article/view/905</self-uri><abstract><p>Цель статьи – ​выявить концептуальные особенности экономических моделей человека, определяющие своеобразие построения альтернативных подходов, а также возможности перехода к более реалистичной модели. Методология исследования определяется тем, что экономика как сложная система обладает особым типом свойств элементов и их отношений, связанных с ее интерсубъективной и дуалистической природой. В статье показано, что современные подходы, порождающие фрагментированные теоретические описания, сложились на основе разных версий стандартной (базовой) модели поведения субъектов экономики, возникшей в ходе маржиналистского переворота. В данной модели экономические мотивы трактуются (явно или неявно) исходя из утилитаристской этики, что порождает необходимость рассмотреть поведение и взаимодействия субъектов в контексте экзогенного влияния неэкономических факторов. Построение неортодоксальных теорий опирается на социокультурную модель человека, предложенную исторической школой, и предусматривает изучение трех уровней экономической реальности. На глубинном уровне на основе рассмотрения ценностно-нормативных представлений и взаимодействий акторов обосновывается специфика формирования институциональной системы экономики. На среднем уровне с помощью институционально-инструментального анализа описывается поведение разных групп ее субъектов с учетом занимаемых ими позиций. Исходя из этого, объясняются происходящие на поверхностном уровне процессы. Теории мейнстрима, опираясь на институциональную модель человека, используют институционально-инструментальный анализ для описания среднего и поверхностного уровней реальности, что сопровождается заимствованием идей классической и немецкой школы, а также неортодоксального институционализма. Предлагается отказаться от упрощенных интерпретаций классической теории и в русле ее идей перейти от стандартной модели к экономико-культурной модели человека, учитывающей дуализм его экономических мотивов. Такая перспектива ориентирует на создание адекватного современной экономике системной парадигмы изучения эндогенных процессов ее трансформации и формирование механизмов успешного суверенного развития национальной экономики.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The purpose of the article is to identify the conceptual features of human economic models that determine the uniqueness of the construction of alternative approaches, as well as the possibility of transition to a more realistic model. The methodology of the research is determined by the fact that the economy as a complex system has a special type of properties of elements and their relationships associated with its intersubjective and dualistic nature. The article shows that modern approaches that generate fragmented theoretical descriptions have developed on the basis of reliance on different versions of the standard (basic) model of behavior of economic entities that arose during the marginalist revolution. In this model, economic motives are interpreted (explicitly or implicitly) based on utilitarian ethics, which creates the need to consider the behavior and interaction of subjects in the context of the exogenous influence of non-economic factors. The construction of unorthodox theories is based on the socio-cultural model of man proposed by the historical school, and provides for the study of three levels of economic reality. At the deep level, based on the consideration of value-normative representations and interactions of actors, the specifics of the formation of the institutional system of the economy are substantiated; at the middle level, with the help of institutional and instrumental analysis, the behavior of different groups of its subjects is described, taking into account their positions; based on this, the processes occurring at the surface level are explained. Mainstream theories, relying on the institutional model of a person, use institutional and instrumental analysis to describe the average and superficial levels of reality, which is accompanied by borrowing the ideas of the classical and German schools, as well as unorthodox institutionalism. The paper proposes to abandon simplified interpretations of the classical theory and, in line with its ideas, move from the standard model to the economic and cultural model of a person, taking into account the dualism of his economic motives. This perspective focuses on the creation of a system paradigm adequate to the modern economy for studying the endogenous processes of its transformation and the formation of mechanisms for the successful sovereign development of the national economy.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>экономическая методология</kwd><kwd>экономическая модель человека</kwd><kwd>альтернативные исследовательские</kwd><kwd>подходы.</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>economic methodology</kwd><kwd>human economic model</kwd><kwd>alternative research approaches</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Автономов В. С. (2014). Еще несколько слов о методологическом индивидуализме // Общественные науки и современность. № 3. С. 53–56.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Avtonomov V. S. (2014). A few more words about methodological individualism. Social Sciences and Contemporary World, no. 3, pp. 53–56 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Автономов В. С. (2022). Три источника и три героя маржиналистской революции // Вопросы экономики. № 7. С. 104–122.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Avtonomov V. S. (2022). Three sources and three heroes of marginal revolution. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 7, pp. 104–122 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бирюков В. (2021). Дуалистическая теория стоимости и особенности изучения экономики как сложной системы // Общество и экономика. № 10. С. 20–40.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Biryukov V. (2021). Dualistic theory of value and features of the study of economics as a complex system. Society and Economics, no. 10, pp. 20–40 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бирюков В. В. (2022). Альтернативные институциональные стратегии разработки монетарных теорий // AlterEconomics. № 2 (19). С. 262–282.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Biryukov V. V. (2022). Paradigmatic features of development institutional alternatives to the formation of monetary theories. AlterEconomics, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 262–282 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Капелюшников Р. (2020). Кто такой homo oeconomicus? // Экономическая политика. Т. 15. № 1. С. 8–39.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kapeliushnikov R. (2020). Who is homo oeconomicus? Economic Policy, vol. 15, no. 1, pp 8–39 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Кирдина-Чэндлер С.Г. (2023). О синтезе и междисциплинарности в экономической теории: сравнение русскоязычного и англоязычного дискурсов // AlterEconomics. № 1(20). С. 59–78.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kirdina-Chandler S.G. (2023). On synthesis and interdisciplinarity in economics: comparison of Russian and English discourses. AlterEconomics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 59–78 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Клейнер Г. Б. (2019). Принципы двойственности в свете системной экономической теории // Вопросы экономики. № 11. С. 127–149.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kleiner G. B. (2019). The principles of duality in the light of the system economic theory. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 11, pp. 127–149 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Клейнер Г. Б. (2021). Перспективы системного расширения институциональной теории // Экономическая наука современной России. № 3(94). С. 7–17.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kleiner G. B. (2021). Prospects for system expansion of institutional economic theory. Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 3 (94), pp. 7–17 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Клейнер Г. Б. (2023). Расширяющаяся вселенная экономической теории // AlterEconomics. № 1(20). С. 1–8.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kleiner G. B. (2023). Expanding universe of economic theory. AlterEconomics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–8 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Лист Ф. (2020). Национальная системы политической экономии. Челябинск: Социум. 451 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">List F. (2020). The national system of political economy. Cheljyabinsk: Socium, 451 p.(in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Лозина О. И., Тутов Л. А. (2020). Методологические предпосылки модели человека в современной экономике // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 6. Экономика. № 5. С. 24–39.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lozina O. I., Tutov L. A. (2020). Methodological background of human model in modern economy. Moscow University Economics Bulletin, no 5, pp. 24–39 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Маевский В. (2010). Воспроизводство основного капитала и экономическая теория // Вопросы экономики. № 3. С. 65–85.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Maevsky V. (2010). Reproduction of fixed capital and economic theory. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 3, pp. 65–85 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Маркс К. (1985). Капитал. Т. 3. Ч. 1. М.: Политиздат. 508 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Marx K. (1985). Capital. Vol. 3. Part. 1. Moscow: Politizdat, 508 p. (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Момджян К. Х. (2023). Общество как институциональная форма существования социальной реальности // Вопросы философии. № 4. С. 18–28.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Momdzhyan K.Kh. (2023) Society as an institutional form of social reality. Voprosy Filosofii, no. 4, pp. 18–28 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Некипелов А. Д. (2019). Кризис в экономической науке – ​природа и пути преодоления // Вестник Российской Академии наук. № 1(89). С. 24–37.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Nekipelov A. D. (2019). Crisis in Economics – ​the nature and ways to overcome. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 24–37 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Норт Д. (1997). Институты, институциональные изменения и функционирование экономики. М.: Фонд экономической книги «Начала», 190 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">North D. (1997). Institutions, institutional changes, and Economic Performance. Moscow: Foundation of the Economic Book «Beginnings» (initially publ. by Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 190 p.) (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Сэмюэлс У. (2002). Институциональная экономическая теория // Панорама экономической мысли в конце 20 века. Т. 1. СПб.: Экономическая школа. С. 125–141.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Samuels W. (2002). Institutional economic theory. Panorama of economic thought at the end of the 20th century. Vol.1. St. Petersburg: Economic School, pp. 125–141 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Фролов Д. П. (2022). Будущее плюралистичной институциональной теории // Вопросы экономики. № 4. С. 45–69.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Frolov D. P. (2022). The future of pluralistic institutional theory. Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 4, pp. 45–69 (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Шмоллер Г. Ф. (2012). Справедливость в народном хозяйстве. Разделение труда. М.: Либроком, 216 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Schmoller G. F. (2012). The validity in the national economy. The division of labor. Moscow: Librokom, 216 p. (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Шумпетер Й. (2001). История экономического анализа в трех томах. T. 3. СПб.: Экономическая школа, 688 c.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Schumpeter J. (2001). The History of economic analysis: In 3 vols. Vol. 3. St. Petersburg: Economic school, 688 p. (in Russian).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Akerlof J. A. (2020). Sins of Omission and the Practice of Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 405–418.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Akerlof J. A. (2020). Sins of Omission and the Practice of Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 405–418.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Alesina A., Giuliano P. (2015). Culture and Institutions. Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 898–944.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Alesina A., Giuliano P. (2015). Culture and Institutions. Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 898–944.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Arrow K. J. (1994). Methodological individualism and social knowledge. American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 1–9.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Arrow K. J. (1994). Methodological individualism and social knowledge. American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 1–9.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Greenwood R., Raynard M., Kodeih F., Micelotta E. R., Lounsbury M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 317–371.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Greenwood R., Raynard M., Kodeih F., Micelotta E. R., Lounsbury M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 317–371.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hodgson G. (2007). Meanings of Methodological Individualism. Journal of Economic Methodology, vol. 14, no 2, pp. 211–226.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hodgson G. (2007). Meanings of Methodological Individualism. Journal of Economic Methodology, vol. 14, no 2, pp. 211–226.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hodgson G. M. (2019). Prospects for international research. RAUSP Management Journal, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 112–120.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hodgson G. M. (2019). Prospects for international research. RAUSP Management Journal, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 112–120.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit27"><label>27</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kurz H. (2016). German and Austrian schools. In: H. Kurz, G. Faccarello (eds.). Handbook on the history of economic analysis. Vol. II. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 252–273.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kurz H. (2016). German and Austrian schools. In: H. Kurz, G. Faccarello (eds.). Handbook on the history of economic analysis. Vol. II. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 252–273.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit28"><label>28</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Lawson T. (2003). Reorienting economics. L.; NY.: Routledge. 412 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lawson T. (2003). Reorienting economics. L.; NY.: Routledge. 412 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit29"><label>29</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Rajan R. (2019). The third pillar: how markets and the state leave the community behind. New York: Penguin Press, 464 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Rajan R. (2019). The third pillar: how markets and the state leave the community behind. New York: Penguin Press, 464 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit30"><label>30</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ross D. (2022). Economics is converging with sociology but not with psychology. Journal of Economic Methodology, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 1–22.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ross D. (2022). Economics is converging with sociology but not with psychology. Journal of Economic Methodology, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 1–22.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit31"><label>31</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Whaley L. (2018). The critical institutional analysis and development (CIAD) framework. International Journal of the Commons, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 137–161.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Whaley L. (2018). The critical institutional analysis and development (CIAD) framework. International Journal of the Commons, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 137–161.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
