Being affected by the global economic crisis the Russian economy has become one of the most distressed. That means that it has very low resistance to external shocks. Within the nearest months Russia will face several very serious macroeconomic challenges. Its potential to overcome the crisis strongly depends on adequacy and timeliness of governments actions, on its ability to identify and implement correct solutions, on its readiness to launch sound incentives for the business.

This paper reflects the main results of the joint project conducted by the State University-Higher School of Economics and the Interdepartmental Analytical Center in order to develop and approbate the methodology for assessing anti-crisis measures of the Russian government. The report is based upon the analysis of about 100 separate anti-crisis measures aimed for the support of the real sector of the Russian economy that were initiated during the period of October 2008 - March 2009. The analysis reveals major beneficiaries of state support in terms of industries, firms size categories. The possible impact of the measures is being evaluated, both at the crisis stage and at the stage of the economy recovery. The report also describes the main risks and threats the government will have to deal with at the implementation stage as well as the contradictory consequences of the anti-crisis economic policy.

The paper connects the current global economic crisis with ending the Long Kondratieff Wave and entering a new one. Neoliberal recipes have been already out of date for such transformation as well as for further functioning of the economy. According to the authors, neither the monetarist nor the Keynesian approaches can substitute them. The only alternative is the synergetic model of development, first of all building the market hierarchy instead of the traditional linear system of governance. The urgent necessity of comprehending strategical interaction between the synergetic transformation and the systemic integrity of economy is stressed upon in the article. All through the paper the crises in the USA and Russia are compared. In particular, it is suggested the crisis in our country might be deeper if one takes into account the difference between the depth of economic and social bottoms in both countries.

The article considers the problems of derivative instruments in the context of the current economic crisis. Theoretical grounds of these classic transactions are presented for modern capitalist reproduction. Some issues for the ongoing discussion on the nature of the crisis are formulated.

The article criticizes neoclassical equilibrium theory which is, to the authors opinion, unable to explain crisis phenomena in the modern economy. The author also criticizes the policy of the Russian government and suggests using Keynesian ideas as a theoretical ground for economic policy as well as switching the attention from monetary issues to the problems of the real sector of economy.

The article written by a prominent American expert analyzes the development of macroeconomic ideas. The author considers the history of macroeconomics as an interaction between applied ("engineer") and theoretical traditions. Although modern theoretical approaches, as he argues, didnt have a serious impact on economic policy, their emergence helped creating rigorous analytical tools used to develop a new generation of models ("New Neoclassical Synthesis"). The latter are to form the basis of new macroeconometric approaches and new macroeconomic engineering.

In the article the contemporary ideology of behavioral finance is discussed. The authors consider the development of behavioral finance and formulate its key principles basing on the analysis of the research literature. The opportunity of using behavioral finance in the theory and practice of business valuation is investigated. Separate components of behavioral finance are suggested for application to business valuation in order to increase its efficiency. Future directions of the research in the field of behavioral finance and behavioral valuation are presented.

The article analyzes the political economy essence of the money emissive activity of central banks. On the basis of the loan funds genesis and the law of circulation of value the conclusion is made that the central bank cannot participate in the creation of value, it only redistributes surplus value through the mechanism of unsecured paper money emission. The interest rate for the central bank loans, unlike commercial interest rate, has no value basis. So, the interest rate is defined by the norm of surplus value. The central bank, via lending its resources with discount, forms steady demand for its money. This model of monetary policy contains crisis potential as it creates unsecured paper money which finds application in numerous bubbles of assets formed worldwide. The revision of the emission institute role in modern reproduction processes is required. The central bank should concentrate on the emission of sound money, sending correct economic signals to subjects of the economy.

The article discusses the interconnections of real sector and monetary sphere. The structure of modern macroeconomic processes is analyzed, and its elements such as production, informational and financial processes are characterized. The main problems of the theory of value are stressed. It is indicated that intensification of financial process has led to forming debt economy which is characterized by soft credit constraints. They define soft demand constraints in the economy and, as a consequence, significant indebtedness of households and increasing financial risks. Money is not neutral in relation to processes in real sector and is able to accelerate them.