Economic culture as a factor in the financial behavior of Russians: the role of archetypes and modern context

Abstract

In Russia, as in many countries, the state is showing increased attention to the topic of financial literacy of the population, which is connected, on the one hand, with the expansion of the financial market inherent in the modern world economy, involving ordinary people in its orbit, and, on the other hand, with the curtail of the welfare state, and the reorientation of citizens to self-financing their needs for pensions, medical care, education, etc. In the process of such pushing up people to become investors, borrowers, participants of funded pension schemes, the specific character of the economic culture of the population is not taken into account, while many observed phenomena, such as low level of financial literacy and massive distrust of financial institutions, are due exactly to it. The article presents analysis of the cultural archetypes and patterns of behavior characteristic of the Russians that make up the economic culture; they were correlated with the models of behavior of the population of interest to the state; the impact on the existing economic culture of the current socio-economic context is considered. It is shown that the natural-climatic, geographic, geopolitical and religious factors have shaped Russians' specific attitude towards savings, their own and other people's property, planning horizons, contractual obligations, separation of common and individual responsibility, financial discipline, work ethics, state and commercial institutions, interpersonal relationships, etc., which is far from that sought by the state. Meanwhile, the problem is that it is the socio-economic policy pursued by the state, the events of the economic life of the past thirty years that act as the factors of reproduction and consolidation of the formed cultural archetypes and patterns of behavior, but not their productive transformation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 47 citations exist upstream.