Conference Programme

We address sovereign default in a stochastic macroeconomic model with infinite horizon and the presence of a debt recovery rule. Sovereign default is analyzed as a market event, when the fiscal authority does not find on the market the funds necessary to meet its financial obligations. We prove the existence of a default threshold dependent on the pricing of public debt and thus on the debt recovery rule. Except in a specific case, this threshold is lower than the traditional solvency ratio. We then offer a new framework for the assessment of public debt sustainability. A public debt is said to be “gamma-sustainable” at date t when its trajectory does not reach the default threshold at any future date, assuming that there is no realization of the gross rate of growth lower than gamma which is smaller than 1. It is said to be “gamma-unsustainable" at date t when its trajectory reaches the default threshold at some finite date, assuming that there is no realization of the gross rate of growth higher than gamma which is higher than 1. When it is neither “gamma’-sustainable”, nor “gamma’-unsustainable”, with gamma’ < 1 < gamma’’, it is in a zone of financial fragility. When a sovereign default occurs, a too large recovery ratio (or equivalently a too small haircut) is not able to insure the sustainability of the post-default debt.

Issues for discussion:
• What are the reasons for the inefficiency of the work of the institute of special legal regimes for territorial development in Russia?
• How to overcome the patterned nature of the use of special legal regimes?
• How to make the institution of special legal regimes a really working tool for the economic development of territories, giving business and local communities a “fishing pole, not a fish”?
• Does Russia have the potential to grow its own Hong Kong?
• Which countries can be Russia's partners in using Russian offshore companies? Can their services be in demand on the international market?

Invited for discussion: V. Sivitskiy (HSE), A. Nikitchenko (Directorate of the Federal Target Plan on Socio-economic development of Crimea and Sevastopol), V. Solodov (Vice-Plenipotentiary of President of the Russian Federation in FEFD), N. Kosbaev (Head of the Legal Department of MFC “Astana”), I. Ognev (VEB), K. Zenin (English solicitor, member of the International Expert Council of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan), Z. Ayvazyan (RANEPA)

The talk will review existing results and present some new ones relating to the following question: on what voting domains can every random strategy-proof social choice functions satisfying unanimity, be expressed as a fixed probability distribution over strategy-proof deterministic social choice functions satisfying unanimity? Answers to this question are important for understanding the extra possibilities for truthful information revelation, introduced by the consideration of random mechanisms.

Illegal markets involving illicit products and transactions have been largely ignored by the scholars, despite their significance in various economies. There is a lack of conceptual categorization and scarcity of reliable data. The study examines the structure and evolution of heterogeneous illegal markets in Russia with a special emphasis on markets of homemade alcohol, counterfeit alcohol, and illegally manufactured alcohol. A variety of statistical sources and survey data is used to demonstrate that the compositions of these markets have come through four different stages since late socialism, depending on the constellation of political, legislative and economic factors. At each stage, some of these markets prevail, whereas others remain undeveloped. Overall, illegal alcohol markets tend to grow in periods of exogenous political or economic shocks and shrink in periods of economic growth. Changes in the structure of illegal markets are backed by a continuous requalification of products, organizations and transactions contesting the boundaries between legality and illegality. Some illegal activities retain their legitimacy due to the ignorance or tolerance of enforcement agencies and final consumers. Boundaries between legitimate and illegitimate activities are blurred and move slowly.

Global exports are growing faster than national gross domestic products. Globalia, the globalized world of the future, offers unlimited growth opportunities. Performance differences between countries are staggering. Among the larger countries Germany is a distant top-performer in per capita exports. This is not due to its large corporations but to the prevalence of mid-sized, little known world market leaders, the so-called Hidden Champions. Germany has far more of these firms than any other country
The Hidden Champions
- have extremely ambitious goals,
- focus on narrow markets combined with global selling and marketing,
- are very close to their customers and extreme innovators,
- their leadership is long-term oriented and grants employees great latitude in execution which in turn creates high motivation and low turnover.
Countries and companies of all types can learn from these unknown role models.

We propose a novel explanation for the most prevalent form of democratic breakdown after the end of the Cold War: the subversion of democracy by incumbents. In the classics of democratization research as well as in mainstream democracy promotion practice, the public's disapproval is assumed to serve as a check on incumbents' temptations to subvert democracy. We explain why this check fails in polarized societies. In the latter, voters have a strong preference for their favorite candidate, which makes it costly for them to punish an incumbent by voting for a challenger. Incumbents exploit this lack of credible punishment by manipulating the democratic process in their favor. Combining data from cross-national surveys and a survey experiment from Venezuela, we show that voters in polarized societies indeed tolerate more electoral manipulation -- as long it benefits their favorite candidate or party. These findings provide a new answer to a fundamental question about the survival of democracy: When can we reasonably expect the public to serve as a check on the authoritarian temptations of elected politicians?

Discussant: E. Yureskul (HSE)

Discussant: A. Titkov (HSE)

Discussant: L. Nikovskaya (IS RAS)

Discussant: V. Lukyanov (“Nevsky angel”)

Issues:
• Assessment of the state of volunteerism and financial philanthropy in Russia;
• Economic efficiency and social effects of charity: what is more important and measurable;
• Applicability of international experience in evaluation of effects and effectiveness of charity activities;
• Prospects of the practical application of technologies of evaluation of effects and effectiveness of charity activities.

Participants: E. Topoleva-Soldunova (Agency for Social Information, HSE), S. Chupysheva (Agency for Strategic Initiatives), A. Metelev (AVC), V. Lukyanov (“Nevsky angel”), K. Razuvaeva (Rospatriotcenter), I. Shvets (“Mosvolonteer”), I. Efremova-Gart (Donors forum), A. Boldyreva (Donors forum), members of the FEC for development of volunteering, international experts

Discussant: M. Rudnev (HSE)

Discussant: T. Stefanenko (MSU)

Discussant: T. Nestik (IP RAS)

Discussants: R. Inglehart (HSE, University of Michigan), F. Sarracino (STATEC)

This lecture will discuss some recent research by myself and others that has been concerned with estimating the causal effect of certain interventions designed to increase educational attainment. One possible policy intervention that has received considerable attention in the United States is to lower or eliminate tuition for community colleges. Several state or regional based programs currently exist that either eliminate or substantially lower tuition for community college. I will discuss researchers attempts to identify the causal effects of these programs on different educational outcomes. I will also discuss research that has estimated the causal effect of programs that try to keep youth in school beyond compulsory education by paying them to attend.

Questions for discussion:
• What are the key aspects of inequality in education that international research projects demonstrate?
• What policies do countries implement to address inequalities in education?
• What are the educational reforms resulting from the analysis of international research projects?
• What reforms in education have a significant impact on the results that countries demonstrate in international monitoring projects?

Participants: C. Aedo (World Bank), K. Vasiliev (World Bank), K. Hirea-Soza (World Bank), M. Jakubowski (Evidence Institute in Poland)

Discussants: A. Pestova (CMASF), A. Polbin (The Gaidar Institute)

The lecture presents overview of the recent studies carried out by a team of Russian researchers. Comparative cross-country analysis of base macroeconomic models reveal key salient features of the Russian labor market (RLM). The strength of most relations in the RLM is typical for emerging markets. The only characteristic which sharply distinguishes RLM from other countries is flexibility of real wages by unemployment rate.
Important structural properties of the RLM include, first, significant interrelation of wages in the public and private sectors, and second, negative impact of pulic employment on the number of people employed in the private sector, and more than that, positive effect of public employment on the unemployment rate.
Our findings reveal thus macroeconomic mechanisms underlying typical patterns of the RLM adjustment. I argue that the concept of the RLM model should be somewhat revised: its salient feature is lack of macro rigidities – hence it is efficient rather than faulty.
Once the RLM demonstrates high ability for adjustment to shocks, there is no case for fiscal and monetary stimulus. Our analysis gives also explanation to a unique feature of RLM: steady increase in the wage share over the last decade, that ran contrary to the global trend.

Issues for discussion:
• Business and power in the Russian regions - inventory of problems
• Regional mechanisms of regional management: features and main directions in the context of changes
• The role of regional business associations in protecting and promoting the interests of entrepreneurs in regional and municipal power structures
• International business in the regional-municipal context - experience in solving problems
• International business in Russian regions - risks and benefits

Invited for discussion: S. Orlova (Governor of the Vladimir region), N. Liubimov (Acting Governor of the Ryazan Region), Ph. Pegorier (AEBRUS, Alstom), S. Borisov (“SUPPORT OF RUSSIA”), V. Cherepov (RUIE), D. Pumpyansky (SRUIE), V. Senin (“Association of Managers”), K. Androsov (Altera Capital), M. Barshchevsky (Plenipotentiary representative of the Government of the Russian Federation in the highest judicial instances, Honored Lawyer of Russia), B. Titiov (Representative of the President for the Protection of the rights of entrepreneurs), I. Yungers (All-Russian IA, RAMI, NULI, INSOR)

Issues for discussion:
• Digital inequality and problems of the future education
• Perception of opportunities for getting education in the Russian society on the basis of surveys
• Technological development and opportunities/need for continuous education
• The image of the desired future and the path towards it
• Models of reforming education in the 21st century

Invited for discussion: A. Bystritskiy (Valdai Discussion Club), V. Fedorov (WCIOM), L. Yakobson (HSE), Y. Kuznetsov (RVC), A. Auzan (MSU), I.Remorenko (MSPU)

Issues for discussion:
• What are the possible mechanisms of effective inclusion of business, budget organizations and society in the decision-making processes at the regional level and participation in the development of the region?
• Around which projects should the agreements be built between the main groups in the regional elites?
• What is the role of the federal government in supporting the processes of interaction within the regional elites and who can act as a guarantor of their implementation?
• What international experience can be used to implement similar initiatives?

Invited for discussion: M. Vshivtseva (SOSPP), I. Kusov (ISEPR Foundation), E. Khan (RPOM), V. Gritskikh (FUND “TUGAN IL”), A. Revkov (Deputy Governor of the Voronezh Region), A. Baranov (State Corporation “Orgprom”), A. Prudnikova (GMVC “ROSIZO”), E. Bragin (UMMC), K. Bogdanenko (OOO MSP “Opora Rossii”), M. Shklyaruk (CSR)

Issues for discussion:
• Which economic programs and reforms in Russia in the XXI century have been the most successful and where the most insignificant results have been achieved?
• What determines the degree of success of various programs and reforms?
• What reforms and / or changes in economic policy are most important at the present time?
• What has to be done to actually carry out the necessary changes?

Invited for discussion: M. Dmitriev (New Economic Growth), A. Klepach (VEB), V. Polterovich (CEMI RAS), A. Yakovlev (HSE), E. Gurvich (EEG), A. Auzan (MSU)

At the end of 2016, a quarter of century passed since collapse of the former USSR. As result, former Soviet republics, including five republics of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan), became the independent states.

The purpose of this lecture is an analysis of results of 25 years transformation in the Central Asian region. The analysis takes into consideration various region’s specifics, including its remote geographic location (far from main centers of the world economy), underdevelopment of transport and trade infrastructure, complicated regional geopolitics, political authoritarianism, lack of capitalist traditions, commodity dependence, low urbanization level, high population growth, etc.

Transformation results differ between individual countries. Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and, to lesser degree, Tajikistan built foundations of market economy and integrated into the global trade system. Kyrgyzstan is the only country, which is politically partly free and pluralistic. On the other end of the regional spectrum, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan continue the command system and remain partly closed to the external world.

Individual countries have also noticed differences in growth rates and development levels. As result of oil and natural gas boom in 2000s and early 2010s, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan joined the group of upper-middle-income countries. Recently, Kazakhstan’s GDP per capita in PPP terms caught up with the Russian level. Other three countries have grown in slower pace. Until now, they moved from low-income to lower-middle-income group of countries.

The sharp decline in world commodity prices in mid-2014 exposed limits of the hitherto growth model and increased urgency of structural diversification of Central Asian economies. However, successful market-based diversification will require intensification of economic and institutional reforms, which does not seem a very likely scenario without political liberalization.

Discussants: D. Davydov (University of Vaasa), M. Mamonov (CMASF)

Discussant: M. Semenova (HSE)

Discussant: M. Shchepeleva (Bank of Russia)

Discussant: H. Penikas (HSE)

Issues:
• Potential volumes of the market development for built-up areas in Russian cities
• Practice of development of the dilapidated residential areas in Russian cities
• Tools of modeling projects for development of built-up areas

Participants: T. Polidi (The Institute for Urban Economics), E. Trutnev (The Institute for Urban Economics), A. Novikov (HSE), V. Stadnikov (HSE), M. Stepanov (The Department of urban planning policy of Moscow), Y. Shcheglova (The Department of urban planning policy of Moscow), E. Korotkova (Strelka KB), I. Zalivukhin (Jauzaproject), I. Romanov (LSR Group), A. Barkhota (AHML), N. Kichigin (The Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law)

Priorities of Russia’s long term development strategy (Strategy–2035) are conditioned by both domestic and external factors. The latter are analyzed in the paper on the basis of the ‘Global Forecast – 2035’ published by the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO) in March 2017. Key trends affecting Russia’s position in the world economy are identified as well as major development opportunities and challenges associated with these trends. Measures to strengthen Russia’s development capacities are proposed for alternative scenarios of global GDP growth, global economic governance, regional economic cooperation/integration and (geo)political tensions.

Discussants: I. Safranchuk (HSE), V. Petrovsky (IFES RAS)

Discussant: A. Portanskiy (HSE)

Discussant: D. Degtyaryov (MGIMO)

Discussant: M. Troitsky (MGIMO)

Discussant: C. Sprenger (HSE), Y. Rodionova (BMSTU)

Discussant: A. Muravyev (HSE - St. Petersburg), Y. Rodionova (BMSTU)

Discussant: S. Stepanov (HSE)

Discussant: L. Ruzhanskaya (UrFU)

Discussant: I. Fomin (INION)

Discussant: B. Makarenko (HSE)

Discussant: Y. Gayvoronsky (HSE)

Discussant: A. Korotaev (HSE)

Discussant: O. Koroteeva (RANEPA)

Discussant: A. Spivak (NFPCC)

Discussant: V. Yakimets (IITP RAS)

Discussant: E. Topoleva-Soldunova (ASI, HSE)

Culture and institutional differences between countries affect which organizational cultures work best in a particular country. However, often managers follow the latest global trend without paying enough attention to how the local context where they operate may affect what organizational cultures work best in their local environment. In addition, Multinationals(MNCs) have an additional challenge compared local firms in that they need to balance pressures to create a standard organizational culture globally and adapt to host countries’ national cultures. This presentation will also explore how to best resolve this tension.

Discussant: V. Roud (HSE)

Discussant: Yu. Milshina (HSE)

Discussant: E. Kutsenko (HSE)

Discussant: S. Zaichenko (HSE)

Discussant: R. Kapelyushnikov (IMEMO RAS, HSE)

Discussant: E. Danilova (IS RAS)

Discussant: P. Ivanov (RANEPA)

Discussant: E. Isaev (RANEPA, HSE)

Discussants: C. Welzel (HSE, Leuphana University of Luneburg), A. Moreno (ITAM)

Discussants: T. Reeskens (Tilburg University), V. Kostenko (HSE)

Topics for discussion:
• Formation of innovative clusters (innovation belts) based on universities. International experience and prospects for Russia.
• Russian educational and scientific centers. New models of networked partnerships in the framework of global economic challenges.
• Network project University-Scientific Center - as an innovative elevator for high-tech projects.
• Modern tools to support networked scientific and educational projects to ensure accelerated economic growth.
• Capitalization of the potential of educational and scientific centers. Methods of valuation of intangible assets. Methodology for assessing “the cost of a university”.

Participants: A. Lavrov (Ministry of Finance of Russia), A. Volkov (Skolkovo), O. Fomichev (Ministry of Economic Development of Russia), A. Shadrin (Ministry of Economic Development of Russia), G. Trubnikov (Ministry of Education and Science of Russia),
M. Kotyukov (FASO Russia), A. Nikitin (Acting Governor of the Novgorod Region), M. Alashkevich (CSR), M. Borovskaya (SFEDU), V. Vasiliev (ITMO University), K. Vasiliev (World Bank), L. Gokhberg (HSE), A. Ivashchenko (NeuroNet), M. Merkulov (HSE), M. Pogosyan (MAI), A. Svinarenko (RUSNANO), A. Sitnikov (Skoltech), A. Suleymanov (World Bank).

Invited for discussion: E. Anokhov (MIPT), M. Astapov (KubSU), M. Belova (ChSU M. Borovskaya (SFEDU), P. Vcherashnii (SibFU), A. Demidov (SPbSUITD), V. Lednev (Synergy University), M. Merkulov (HSE), A. Rechinsky (SPbPolyTechU), G. Romanova (SSU), Z. Saidov (ChStUn), D. Sandler (UrFU), T. Klyachko (RANEPA), V. Koshkin (Sevastopol State University), A. Nikolaenko (Moscow Poly), V. Tarakanov (Volgograd State University), I. Teleshova (Moscow State University), E. Temnov (TulSU), M. Yunusov (IKBFU), N. Ushatsky (SPbSEU)

The global environment remains fragile and continued weakness in systemically large economies, expected tighter global liquidity conditions, and political uncertainty pose downside risks. An extended period of global risk aversion could set back global growth. Under such a scenario, those emerging markets with pre-existing vulnerabilities would likely be most affected. The presentation will highlight current economic developments, expose challenges to sustainable growth and highlight structural reforms most conducive to supporting long-term growth.

Issues for discussion:
• Economic ties between Russia and South Africa: the effect of joining the BRICS
• Development of foreign policy ties: before and after BRICS?
• Russian-South African cooperation in the field of education and science within the BRICS
• Personality issues - politico-psychological approach in the analysis of foreign policy activity

Invited for discussion: H. Short (Minister Plenipotentiary of South African Embassy in the Russian Federation), T. Dalamba (Counsellor of South African Embassy in the Russian Federation), A. Arkhangelskaya (IAS RAS), N. Volchkova (NES), V. Shubin (IAS RAS), V. Sidorov (IAS RAS)

Issues for discussion:
• Ranking of Russian economic based on stratification by expert academic community of economists,
• Ranking of journals by the methods of selection theory,
• Ranking of journals based on network analysis,
• Evaluation of experts' opinion about different indicators of publication activity.

Invited for discussion: M. Yudkevich (HSE), A. Rubinstein (IE RAS), F. Aleskerov (HSE), A. Muravyev (HSE – St. Petersburg), V. Pislyakov (HSE), A. Subochev (HSE), Y. Simachev (HSE), E. Balatskiy (Financial University), I. Sterlingov (HSE), V. Avtonomov (HSE)

The objective many telecom regulators want to achieve when they decide to
auction spectrum is that spectrum is allocated efficiently and that acquiring firms pay a market price.
The traditional simultaneous multi-round auction (SMRA) may fail in this respect, as it provides bidders
with an opportunity to engage in strategic demand reduction. However, we will argue that the recently proposed and used
combinatorial clock auction (CCA) does not fare better in this respect if bidders have only the slightest
preference to raise rivals’ cost. The CCA provides bidders with opportunities to
engage in strategic demand expansion without running the risk of obtaining spectrum they do not want to acquire.

Discussant: S. Golovan (NES)

Discussant: S. Kurochkin (HSE)

Discussant: M. Chernova (RANEPA)

Issues:
• Is the globalization of the world economy starting to reverse? How long might the process take?
• What are the consequences of transformation of globalization processes for economic growth, inequality, global problems solving, stability of the global economic system?
• How does the role of global institutions and regional initiatives change for the global economy?
• Do sanctions become a generally accepted instrument of foreign trade policy in the new environment?
• What does the thansformation of globalization processes mean to Russia? How to ract on it?

Participants: A. Apokin (CMASF), S. Afontsev (IMEMO RAS), L. Grigoryev (HSE, Analytical Center for the Government of the RF), S. Karaganov (HSE), A. Knobel (RFTA), A. Kuznetsov (IMEMO RAS), I. Makarov (HSE), A. Portanskiy (HSE)

The approach of heterogeneous exporting firms is a mainstream of empirical and theoretical research in modern international trade. Firm’s heterogeneity defines extra channels through which trade liberalization affects the effectiveness and competitiveness of the open economy. Besides, firms’ heterogeneity emphasize the role of foreign market access costs not only for trade flows but also for the variety and prices of domestic goods sold to domestic consumers.
In this presentation, I will survey empirical studies of Russian manufacturing exporting firms in the framework of heterogeneous firms’ models. The comparison of these results with the corresponding studies performed in other countries along with other direct and indirect evidence point out on very high costs of exporting faced by Russian firms. I will also survey studies that analyze the factors behind high costs of exporting.

Discussant: B. Kuznetsov (HSE)

Discussant: E. Borisova (HSE)

The discussion is organized by editorial staff of “Journal of Corporate Finance Research” HSE.
Issues:
• Corporate decision making and governance mechanisms in innovative companies. How to make an efficient board in ‘new sectors’?
• Behavioral corporate finance as a new system of corporate finance. How behavioral biases of managers influence the corporate decisions?
• The epoch of fintech and big data in emerging markets.

Invited for discussion: the leading specialists of HSE, NES, Financial University, SPbUE, UrFU

Discussant: R. Evstifeev (VB RANEPA)

Discussant: M. Shabanova (HSE)

Discussant: O. Drozdova (Agency for Social Information)

Issues:
The Round table is dedicated to the problems of liberalism as the broad spectrum of interrelated values and practices traditionally associated with individual freedom, property rights, or the rule of law. The prospects of liberalism are currently under re-evaluation at present conditions of social, cultural, political and administrative realities of modern World with its challenges of innovative and controversial development.
To discuss the Russian liberalism history, its current transformations, and prospects, is one of main subjects of the Round table. The results of Round table opinions exchanges will be used at the process of planning for the next events of RESET foundation, including the conference in Torino (Italy, October 2017).

Participants: A. Barabashev (HSE), A. Graziosi (Agenzia Nazionale di Valutazione del Sistema Universitario e della Ricerca), A. Masoero (University of Genoa), A. Melville (HSE), G. Sauvé (Carleton University)

Issues:
• Nudge trchnologies in state regulation – justification and disputes.
• Whether the coice is logicat: “to nurse” or “to push”?
• The practice of using a behavioral approach in state regulation abroad.

Participants: A. Klimenko (HSE), D. Tsygankov (HSE), A. Belianin (HSE), A. Shestakova (HSE), A. Suvorov (HSE), A. Solodukhina (MSU), V. Spiridonov (RANEPA), E. Nenakhova (Bank of Russia), A. Chirkov (Bank of Russia), M. Yunusova (Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation), O. Udovichenko (Sberbank of Russia)

Issues:
• The performative turn in the humanities: the role of creative industries
• Impact of global technological trends on the development of creative industries in Russia
• A collective project in creative industry
• New media as an industry of cultural practices: production and consumption of meanings
• Conceptual convergence strategy of science and art: syntopy against industry of images
• Fashion Photography: opportunity of/for look
• Discipline of body in the Internet era
• Furniture design in the Soviet Union and modern Russia: problems of continuity
• Creative industries - innovation sector for cultural-economic partnership

Participants: I. Sirotkina (IHST RAS), U. Aristova (HSE), R. Sherifzyanov (HSE), K. Eltsova (RSUH), T. Fadeeva (history of modern arts expert), O. Annanurova (The Lumiere Brothers center for fotography), K. Gusarova (MSSES), A. Dezhurko (HSE), T. Abankina (HSE)

Issues:
• Fashion canon and creative consumer: the practice of fashion narratives in everyday suit
• Hipsters as a cultural product and the creators of urban culture
• The structure and system of interaction in the creative teams
• Love and deficits: the problem of consumption in the late Soviet cinema
• Time without geniuses: a new contract with the consumer
• Cinema attractions: tricks of the entertainment industry
• Screen image: video art and mass culture
• Videos in modern theater as a relevant mean of communication

Participants: L. Goralik (HSE), O. Zaporozhets (HSE), I. Sobol (HSE), T. Dashkova (RSUH), M. Nisenbaum (HSE), T. Bakina (HSE), A. Staruseva-Persheeva (HSE, VGIK), A. Krasnoslobodskaya (HSE, GITIS)

Questions for discussion:
Universities with Master's Programs in Hospitality and Hotel Business: Major Problems of the Interaction

Participants: O. Balaeva (HSE), L. Bekmuhametova (Lotte Hotel Moscow), T. Vlasova (Hilton Garden Inn Moscow Krasnoselskaya), K. Goryainov (The Moscow City Department for Multicultural Relations, Interregional Cooperation, and Tourism), P. Elnikov (DLA Piper Rus Limited), I. Ivashkevich (Parc Inn by Radisson Odintsovo), S. Ivashkevich (Ivashkevich Hospitality), V. Kabalina (HSE), P. Kabanova (Hilton Worldwide), P. Krivolapova (Intercontinental Moscow Tverskaya hotel), M. Kruchkova (DigitalWill), O. Pimenova (Hilton Garden Inn Moscow New Riga), I. Popovkin (HSE), A. Saburova (Intercontinental Moscow Tverskaya hotel), S. Skorbenko (DigitalWill), K. Shmatkova (The St. Regis Moscow Nikolskaya), M. Turygina (hotel Sretenskaya), М. Lazutkina (Swissotel Krasnye Holmy)

Questions for discussion:
Universities with Master's Programs in Hospitality and Hotel Business: Directions for the Future Cooperation

Participants: O. Balaeva (HSE), L. Bekmuhametova (Lotte Hotel Moscow), T. Vlasova (Hilton Garden Inn Moscow Krasnoselskaya), K. Goryainov (The Moscow City Department for Multicultural Relations, Interregional Cooperation, and Tourism), P. Elnikov (DLA Piper Rus Limited), I. Ivashkevich (Parc Inn by Radisson Odintsovo), S. Ivashkevich (Ivashkevich Hospitality), V. Kabalina (HSE), P. Kabanova (Hilton Worldwide), P. Krivolapova (Intercontinental Moscow Tverskaya hotel), M. Kruchkova (DigitalWill), O. Pimenova (Hilton Garden Inn Moscow New Riga), I. Popovkin (HSE), A. Saburova (Intercontinental Moscow Tverskaya hotel), S. Skorbenko (DigitalWill), K. Shmatkova (The St. Regis Moscow Nikolskaya), M. Turygina (hotel Sretenskaya), М. Lazutkina (Swissotel Krasnye Holmy)

Discussant: O. Isupova (HSE)

Discussant: A. Deryugin (RANEPA), Y. Urozhaeva (McKinsey consultant)

Discussants: B. Sokolov (HSE), H. Duelmer (University of Cologne)

Discussants: E. Uslaner (University of Maryland), A. Almakaeva (HSE)

Discussants: N. Soboleva (HSE), A. Shirokanova (HSE)

Discussants: R. Firat (Georgia State University), A. Almakaeva (HSE)

Simon Hay, Mohsen Naghavi, Laurie Marczak, Meghan Mooney, Russia Burden of Disease Collaborators
Background: Results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 (GBD) were utilized to evaluate trends in mortality and causes of death in Russia from 1990 to 2015.
Methods: The GBD 2015 study is a worldwide collaborative effort that analyzes the most up-to-date and accurate information, through advanced and transparent methods, in order to measure the impact of health conditions. For the period of 1990 to 2015, trends in life expectancy, sources of mortality, and contribution of major risk factors in Russia were compared against patterns of change in seven similar countries: China, Finland, Germany, Japan, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, and the United States. Health progress was further evaluated by developing a novel metric we refer to as the Socio-demographic Index (SDI). The SDI incorporates lag-dependent income per capita, total fertility rate for the population, and the average educational attainment in the population over 15 years of age. Each component is scaled from zero – the lowest value observed across all geographies and time periods considered – and one, the highest value observed. The final SDI value is the geometric mean of equally weighted components. The SDI score for Russia as calculated for GBD 2015 was 0.86; among the countries selected for comparison, the SDI was 0.68 in China, 0.81 in both Kazakhstan and Ukraine, 0.89 in Finland, 0.90 in both Japan and Germany, and 0.93 in the United States.
Results: In the past decade Russia has seen a steady improvement in life expectancy, as well as considerable reductions in mortality across a number of causes of death. There were marked improvements in child mortality between 2000 and 2015, with an 55.0% (53.7-56.9%) decrease. Progress was also seen through decreases in neonatal disorders and deaths, and notable reductions in maternal disorders and deaths. However, compared to countries at similar levels of development, mortality rates in Russia are high and life expectancy is low. Overall, the greatest number and highest rates of mortality were due to cardiovascular disease. Cardiovascular disease accounted for 57.5% (56.8-58.2%) of total mortality in 2015. Further, Russian men have a disproportionate burden over women, having a higher risk of premature death at younger ages associated with behavioral risk factors. Trends in mortality over this period are significantly related to patterns of alcohol consumption, drug use, smoking, metabolic risk factors, and changes in health care capacity and access. Although there have been recent declines in mortality, death rates due to alcohol and drug use are higher in Russia than for other countries at similar levels of development.
Conclusion: Russia has made improvements in its overall mortality and life expectancy over the past 25 years; however, alcohol and drug abuse continues to be a primary cause of premature morality. These factors can be mitigated through preventive health care and national policy, and therefore present a direction for future health care system improvements.

In this talk, I will give a brief overview of the importance of assessing the performance of educational institutions. In particular, I will focus on evaluating the efficiency of schools and universities as defined as producing the maximum amount of outputs, given the available inputs - within the economic framework of the Educational Production Function (EPF). I will illustrate how production frontier methods are particularly well-suited for the purpose of assessing institutions' efficiency. Also, I will provide some results from my previous and current research devoted to the study of efficiency of educational institutions in a multi-country perspective.

Issues:
1) what explains the successes and failures of the Russian education system reforms during the last 25 years?
2) what needs to be done to engage the key social groups in the reforms and to ensure public support for the transformation?

Participants: T. L. Klyachko (RANEPA), I. V. Abankina (HSE), I. M. Remorenko (MSPU), L. N. Dukhanina (Russian Parliament (State Duma)), A. I. Adamskiy (Institute of Educational Policy “Eureka”)

Issues:
• Russian in Post-soviet countries and abroad
• Russian and other languages in multilingual environment
• Language interference in contemporary mass media

Participants: I. Kulmoja (University of Tartu), M. Niznik (Tel Aviv University), M. Navruzbekov (A. Donish institute of history, archeology and ethnography), M. Perotto (University of Bologna), A. Nikunlassi (University of Helsinki), E. Protasova (University of Helsinki)

The seminar will be held on April 14, 2017 as a part of the XVIII April International Academic Conference On Economic and Social Development at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow. Contributions from all fields of finance are invited. Submissions that use emerging capital markets data and comparison with European and other developed capital markets are especially welcome.
We are pleased to announce Dr. João Paulo Vieito the Professor of Finance at Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo, Portugal and the Chairman of The World Finance Conference as key note speaker.
The main objective of the seminar is to foster contacts and stimulate exchange between young scholars, as well as to introduce the Higher School of Economics to a new generation of highly qualified young researchers. PhD students will be invited to give 20 minutes presentations, and will then receive detailed feedback from senior academics in the field.

Discussants: A. Ivanov (HSE), D. Kolas (EAEU Court), A. Naumov (EEC), M. Karliuk (HSE)

This research aims to provide a frame of mind to understand the link between structural change and regional unemployment, and, based on it, to survey the most recent literature. An overly optimistic view on the ability of the adjustment mechanism to generate convergence in local unemployment rates has long neglected the question of how regional imbalances arise in the first place. The availability of new longitudinal data sets allows us looking again at this issue with a fresh look, starting from patterns of reallocation among labour market statuses. The main conclusion of recent research is that high unemployment regions have a higher, not a lower rate of reallocation; this suggests, in turn, that they do not suffer from low job creation, but, rather, from high job destruction, and this is because of the low competitiveness of any economic activity. Our findings sound as a renowned justification of the need for demand side policy, especially aimed at increasing the life expectancy of private businesses in high unemployment regions.

Discussant: E. Semerikova (HSE)

Discussant: A. Gladysheva (HSE)

Discussants: A. Oshchepkov (HSE), M. Kokoreva (HSE)

Discussant: A. Akhremenko (HSE)

Discussant: V. Vasilyeva (HSE)

Discussants: E. Ponarin (HSE), A. Shcherbak (HSE)

Discussants: B. Sokolov (HSE), F. Sarracino (STATEC)

Questions for discussion:
1) What are the dominating global trends in reforms of national education systems?
2) Can we reveal specific approaches that are typical for transitional societies?
3) What lessons can Russia learn from international experience?

Participants: B. P. McCall (University of Michigan School of Education), T. Agasisti (Politecnico di Milano), A. Schleicher (OECD), D. Semenov (HSE), A. Klimov (former Deputy Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation)

The study of education modernization attracts lots of attention in China. There is a widespread consensus among scholars that education modernization is not only the advanced world level of education development, but also the efforts and the process of catching up with or maintaining the advanced world level. Education modernization is a state of higher level of national education development, which goes beyond the traditional education. The content of education modernization mainly refers to the education idea, the education system, the education policies, the education substance, the education method and the modernization of the governance. Promoting education modernization will enable people to have more opportunities for lifelong learning, will improve the quality of education, will make educational development results more equitable to all the people, will improve significantly educational innovation ability, and will also develop a more mature and well-defined education system. Seven objective indexes- being more secure,being more popular, being more suitable, being fairer, being of higher quality, having a more sound system, having more contributions and being more satisfied with one subjective aim, is considered by some scholars as core targets for education modernization; There are also scholars that design the system of education modernization by five dimensions- popularity and fairness, level and quality, service and contribution, conditions and security, informationization and internationalization; Some scholars suggest that the signs of education modernization should be that the investment, efficiency, quality and equity of education reached the advanced world level. Based on national conditions and traditional culture, We should learn and absorb the concept and experiences of the international education modernization, to build the theory system and practice model of education modernization with Chinese characteristics.

China promotes education modernization, and it is aimed at fully developing and making full use of the world's largest, most abundant and most valuable human resources to lay a human resource foundation for the grand goal of modernization; supporting national modernization consistently by education modernization ; giving priority to the development of education.

The core of modernization is human modernization. Human modernization requires firstly education modernization. Chinese education promotes human modernization, strives to improve students 'social responsibility to serve the people and the country, and to cultivates students' innovative spirit and practical ability.

China promotes education modernization, considers Education Equality as a basic education policy, so that all people enjoy a more equitable access to education; China improves consistently the quality of education, so that people enjoy education resources of a better quality; China optimizes the educational structure, to meet the needs for talent and intelligence with economic and social development; China efforts to promote the development of educational connotations by deepening the comprehensive education reform and improving constantly the educational system.