2022. vol. 17. No. 4

Sociocultural factors have become a one of the priority areas in research within the framework of theories of long-term development. This article discusses the parameters of groups of countries (values of survival-self-expression and traditional-secular-rational values) according to the Inglehart – Welzel cultural map, along with other sociocultural and socio-economic indicators. The significant cumulative advantage (gross domestic product (GDP) per capita) of three groups of countries – Anglo-Saxon, Protestant and Catholic – compared to the rest reflects a long history of world progress. A number of the social parameters of these groups probably reflect their level of development, to which other factors have played a role in the long term. A key question addressed in the article. is whether sociocultural factors that have developed over long periods have a significant impact on the behaviour of countries in the context of modern crises, and in this case, on the incidence of vaccination in countries in critical conditions. To answer this question, qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis have been conducted using the instance of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020–21. The hypothesis was tested on an array of 80–94 countries for which there was relevant statistical data. The tables and calculations presented in the article indicate the following results: countries more advanced in the direction of self-expression values on the Inglehart scale demonstrate higher vaccination scores and lower disease scores, and those oriented toward secular-rational values have higher rates of suicide than countries with predominantly traditional views.

The study was carried out as part of the HSE Program for Fundamental Research, as well as with grant support from the HSE Faculty of World Economy and International Affairs in 2022

At the 2021 Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Glasgow, many leading economies have cemented the intention of achieving carbon neutrality by mid-century (2050–2070). However, the geopolitical and economic crisis of 2022 threatens to reduce the priority of decarbonization policy and postpone the introduction of more restrictive measures. In the face of growing constraints, the choice of climate policy instruments becomes even more complex and important. It is necessary to analyze different options from the low-carbon development policy toolkit, to understand their strengths and weaknesses, and their potential to be used to build a comprehensive policy. This article analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of emissions trading systems (ETS) as a tool for direct carbon pricing – a measure that experts from international organizations, as well as the academic community, believe is essential for achieving climate goals.Despite the fact that carbon taxes (the second option of direct pricing) is easier to implement and administer, many jurisdictions still opt for an ETS. Several factors influence the choice of ETS as a decarbonization tool: if optimally designed, a market-based mechanism provides cost-effective emission reductions, there is potential for linkage into a larger systems, the flexibility of the instrument can also provide additional benefits, Chinaʼs national ETS is a good example of exploiting the ETSʼ flexibility. Political and administrative characteristics (EU, Germany, UK, California), Kyoto, Brussels, and OECD effects (Mexico and other jurisdictions) play an important role in the choice in favour of ETS.The experience of complex and comprehensive low-carbon development strategies already being implemented shows that it is not necessary to place the ETS at the center, making it the cornerstone of policy. The role of ETS in the entire set of decarbonization measures can be central, supportive, or enabling. ETS can have different objectives and stimulate not only direct emission reductions, but also technological transformation, energy transition.For Russia as a federal state, conducting pilot projects with different instruments of carbon pricing implemented in different regions seems to be the best solution for the near future and finding the right instruments for the Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions Development Strategy.

The European Union (EU) is striving to become a world leader in the field of “green economy.” It promotes its own models, standards, conditions, and related positions on climate and environmental policy in other states. Trade agreements, including provisions on climate and the environment, have become one of the instruments of influence on the policy of partners and economic relations with them in the area of climate protection. The inclusion of these provisions is of economic rather than political importance, especially in terms of eliminating tariff and non-tariff barriers. The EU has developed a chapter on trade and sustainable development, which includes commitments on environmental and climate protection. As part of its implementation, the EU provides financial and technical support to partners. Nevertheless, the content of the chapter largely depends on the position of the partner and the climate policy it pursues, and in some cases – on the administration of the country. Dispute resolution within the framework of the existing mechanism of the chapter “Trade and Sustainable Development” turned out to be difficult, which prompted the EU to include new settlement options, among which the introduction of trade sanctions is an extreme measure. The article on sustainable forest management is also of economic importance for European producers, and the inclusion of references to international environmental agreements contributes to the EU’s plans to reform the World Trade Organization (WTO). The agreements leave out a number of areas of cooperation and require updating as new climate commitments are made, which has been the focus of the EUʼs work in recent years.

Today, cryptoeconomics is actively developing throughout the globe, that is, the use of cryptographic technologies for creation of new digital products, including the issuance of financial instruments based on cryptographic technologies, such as digital financial assets. The topic of regulation of digital financial assets (hereinafter referred to as DFA) is relevant in the world: since 2019, some countries, including Russia, for the first time began to introduce legal norms regarding the issuance of digital financial assets, as well as the sale and turnover of such assets on the market. The purpose of the article is to compare approaches to the regulation of digital financial assets in Russia and in the world, including the issues of determining financial instruments that will be related to digital financial assets, aspects of the procedure for issuing, storing and trading digital financial assets, including the basic rights and obligations of issuers and investors in such assets, features of the operation of trading floors and platforms for issuing DFA.