In the paper we critically assess the stimulative monetary policy, proposed by the Stolypin Club and other experts. We discuss its inflationary consequences, the ability to accelerate economic growth along with created distortions in credit markets. We argue that the long-term macroeconomic stability cannot be sustained under managed exchange rate. We provide counterarguments to views, according to which inflation in Russia has nonmonetary roots and it is possible to increase money supply without causing inflation due to undermonetization of Russian economy and low utilization of production capacities. Negative consequences of monetary easing are illustrated with recent Belorussian experience.

Basing on the analysis of discussions around industrial policy definitions and justifications, the paper suggests a new conception of industrial policy: it is an assemblage of government’s intentions to make up good economy and tools to effectuate the intentions. The variety of the meanings of the term “good economy” and cognitive patterns that can influence the understanding adopted by government are analyzed. The results of recent positive researches which revealed some economies’ structural features that promote economic resilience and competitiveness are summarized. It is shown that the achievement of these structural features can contradict some governments’ political goals.

The article considers the problems of industrial policy and, accordingly, the industrial development strategy from the standpoint of the challenges facing the industry, the conditions for the adoption of strategic decisions and possible answers - the key directions of state activities. The main principles and directions are analyzed: investment, foreign trade, technological policies, certain aspects of territorial planning, state corporate and social policies. Proposals on the prospective goal-setting and possible results of industrial policy have been formulated.

The paper estimates capacity utilization rate in Russian manufacturing. We also propose the way of building continuous time series of production capacity and analytical indicators used to describe the basic characteristics of production capacity. The data comes from statistical form No. 1-Natura-BM of Russian Federal State Statistics Service. Our findings about trends and structural characteristics of production capacity are shown to be significant for economic policy.

This essay examines game theory’s transformation to becoming the major tool in economics, arguing that the initial excitement surrounding game theory has dissipated not because game theory has retreated from its initial bridgehead, but because it has extended its reach throughout economics. Next, it discusses some key challenges for game theory, including the continuing problem of dealing with multiple equilibria, the need to make game theory useful in applications, and the need to better integrate noncooperative and cooperative game theory. Finally it considers the current status and future prospects of game theory.

Game theory has been a huge success in economics. Many important questions have been answered, and game theoretic methods are now central to much economic investigation. We suggest areas where further advances are important, and argue that models of learning are a promising route for improving and widening game theory’s predictive power while preserving the successes of game theory where it already works well. We emphasize in particular the need for better understanding of the speed with which learning takes place.

The paper deals with the past, current and future situation in Russian capital outflow and inflow. The specific features of the past situation (2001-2013) were as follows: big scale of Russian participation in international capital movement; turnover of national capital between Russia and offshores; stable surplus of capital outflow over inflow; inadequacy of industrial structure of capital inflow to Russian needs. The current situation is characterized by such new features as radical cut in volumes of capital outflow and inflow, some decrease in its level of offshorization. In the mid-term the probability of continuation of current trends is high. In the long-term the mode of Russian participation in international capital movement will prima facie depend on prospects of realization of systematic reforms in the Russian economy.