Теория периферийного капитализма: к вопросу о применимости латиноамериканской модели к странам Прибалтики: опыт междисциплинарного анализа

10. Malinova, O. 2002 -- 2003, Another look at "transit,” or about the benefits and harms of narrative schemes, Cosmopolis, no, 2, p. 139--148 (in Russ).

Primakov, E.M. 2014, 2013: difficult problems of Russia. Why today it is impossible to agree with the policy of neoliberals, Rossiiskaya gazeta -- Stolichnyi vypusk [Russian newspaper -- Capital issue], January 14, 2014, no. 5(6277), available at: https://rg.ru/2014/01/13/primaka ov. html (accessed 23.05.2019) (in Russ).

12. Furcheri, D., Lungani, P. 2016, Opening up opportunities for inequality, Finansy i razvitie [Finance and Development], vol. 53, no. 1, p. 43--46 (in Russ.).

13. Furceri, D., Loungani, P. 2015, Capital Account Liberalization and Inequality, IMF Working Paper, no. 15/243, Washington, p. 25. doi: 10.5089/9781513531083.001.

14. Vudraff, D.M. 2001, Power and Prosperity: The Outgrowth of Communist and Capitalist Dictatorships, Konstitutsionnoe pravo: Vostochnoevropeiskoe obozrenie [Constitutional Law: Eastern European Review], no. 2 (35), p. 213--219 (in Russ).

15. Fridmen, M., Khaiek, F. 2003, O svobode. Vserii «Filosofiya svobody» [About freedom. In the series "Philosophy of Freedom”], no. II, Moscow, s182 p. (in Russ).

16. Gaidar, E.T. 1996, Anomalies of Economic Growth, Voprosy ekonomiki, no. 12, p. 20--39 (in Russ.).

17. Maksimtsev, I.A., Mezhevich, N.M., Koroleva, A.V. 2017, Economic Development of the Baltic and Nordic Countries: Characteristics of Economic Models, Balt. Reg., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 60--78. doi: 10.5922/2079-8555-2017-1-4.

18. Porter, M. 1998, On Competition.

19. Prebish, R. 1981, Peripheral Capitalism: Does it have an alternative? Mexico, Fondo de Cultura Economica.

20. Wang, J. 2018, Innovation and government intervention: A comparison of Singapore and Hong Kong, Research Policy, vol. 47, no. 2, p. 399--412. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.008.

21. Alba, J.D., Liu, J., Chia, W.-M., Park, D. 2020, Foreign output shock in small open economies: A welfare evaluation of monetary policy regimes, Economic Modelling, no. 86, p. 101 -- 116. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2019.06.005.

22. Branstetter, L.G., Kwon, N. 2018, South Korea's transition from imitator to innovator: The role of external demand shocks, Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, no. 49, p. 28--42. doi: 10.1016/j.jjie.2018.01.004.

23. Frank, A.G. 1990, A Theoretical Introduction to 5,000 Years of World System History, Review, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 155--248.

24. Baran, P.A. 1958, The Political Economy of Growth, The American Economic Review, vol. 48, no. 1, p. 164--170.

25. North, D.N. 1992, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, p. 92.

26. Dus Santus Teotoniu Struktura zavisimosti, 2008, Skepsis, no. 5, available at: http://scepsis. net/library/id_2297.html (accessed 18.07.2019) (in Russ.).

27. Campos, N.F., Coricelli, F., Moretti, L. 2018, Institutional Integration and Economic Growth in Europe, Journal of Monetary Economics, no. 103, May, p. 88 -- 104. doi: 10.1016/j. jmoneco.2018.08.001.

28. Landesmann, M.A., Stollinger, R. 2019, Structural change, trade and global production networks: An `appropriate industrial policy' for peripheral and catching-up economies, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, no. 48, p. 7 -- 23. doi: 10.1016/j. strueco.2018.04.001.

29. Gaysset, I., Lagoarde-Segot, T., Neaime, S. 2019, Twin deficits and fiscal spillovers in the EMU's periphery, A Keynesian perspective, Economic Modelling, no. 76, p. 101 -- 116. doi: 10.1016/j. econmod.2018.07.023.

30. Rupert, P., Sustek, R. 2019, On the mechanics of New-Keynesian models, Journal of Monetary Economics, no. 102, p. 53--69. doi: 10.1016/j. jmoneco.2019.01.024.

31. Jump, R.C., Levine, P. 2019, Behavioural New Keynesian models, Journal of Macroeconomics, no. 59, p. 59--77. doi: 0.1016/j. jmacro.2018.11.002.

32. Grundke, R., Moser, C. 2019, Hidden protectionism? Evidence from non-tariff barriers to trade in the United States, Journal of International Economics, no. 117, p. 143 -- 157. doi: 10.1016/j. jinteco.2018.12.007.

33. Basu, K. 2018, The rise of Trump and an agenda for regulatory reform, Journal of Policy Modeling, vol. 40, no. 3, p. 546--558. doi: 10.1016/j. jpolmod.2018.03.007.

34. Steinberg, J.B. 2019, Brexit and the macroeconomic impact of trade policy uncertainty, Journal of International Economics, no. 117, p. 175 -- 195. doi: 10.1016/j. jinteco.2019.01.009.

35. Larsen, S.U. (ed.) 2009, Teoriya i metody v sovremennoi politicheskoi nauke: pervaya popytka teoreticheskogo sinteza: sbornik statei norvezhskikh politologov [Theory and methods in modern political science: the first attempt at theoretical synthesis: a collection of articles by Norwegian political scientists] Moscow, 750 p. (in Russ).

36. Dombi, A., Grigoriadis, T. 2020, State history and the finance-growth nexus: Evidence from transition economies, Economic Systems, vol. 44, no. 1. doi: 10.1016/j. ecosys.2019.100738.

37. Herschenkron, A. 1962, The Approach to European Industrialization: a Postscript, In: Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective: A Book of Essaysm Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press.

38. Veltmeyer, H. 2020, Latin America in the vortex of social change: Development and social movement dynamics. World Development, no. 130. doi: 10.1016/j. worlddev.2020.104916.

39. Orekhovsky, P.A., 2016, Preryvistyi trend razvitiya strukturalizma: al'ternativnaya tradit- siya ekonomicheskogo analiza: Doklad [The Intermittent Trend of Structuralism: An Alternative Tradition of Economic Analysis: Report], Moscow, 47 p. (in Russ).

40. Agoraki, M.-E.K., Kouretas, G.P., Triantopoulos, C. 2020, Democracy, regulation and competition in emerging banking systems, Economic Modelling, nol. 84, p. 190--202. doi: 10.1016/j. econmod.2019.04.009.

41. Latov, Yu.V. 2005, Theory of dependence on previous development in the context of institutional economic history, Ekonomicheskii vestnik Rostovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Economic Bulletin of Rostov State University], vol. 3, no. 3, p.36--43 (in Russ).

42. Puffert, D.J. 2003, Path Dependence, Network Form and Technological Change. In: Sundstrom, W., Guinnane, T., Whatley, W. (eds.) History Matters: Essays on Economic Growth, Technology and Demographic Change, Stanford, Stanford University Press, p.263.

43. Schiermeier, O. 2019, How Estonia blazed a trail in science. A small nation found strength in research after joining the European Union, Nature, vol. 565, p. 416--418. doi: 10.1038/d41586- 019-00209-7.

44. Nuvolari, A. 2019, Understanding successive industrial revolutions: A "development block” approach, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, no. 32, p. 33--44. doi: 10.1016/j. eist.2018.11.002.

45. Tobon-Valencia, E., Lamouri, S., Pellerin, R., Dubois, P., Moeuf, A. 2019, Production Planning in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: A Literature Review, IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 52, no. 13, p. 2158--2163. doi: 10.1016/j. ifacol.2019.11.525.

46. Rosik, P., Pomianowski, W., Komornicki, T., Goliszek, S., Szejgiec-Kolenda, B., Duma, P. 2020, Regional dispersion of potential accessibility quotient at the intra-European and intranational level. Core-periphery pattern, discontinuity belts and distance decay tornado effect, Journal of Transport Geography, no. 82. doi: 10.1016/j. jtrangeo.2019.102554.

47. Ahlborn, M., Wortmann, M. 2018, The core-periphery pattern of European business cycles: A fuzzy clustering approach, Journal of Macroeconomics, no. 55, p. 12 -- 27. doi: 10.1016/j. jmac- ro.2017.08.002.

48. Vallerstain, I. 2000, Globalization or transition? Ekonomicheskie strategii [Economic strategies], no. 2, p. 14--26 (in Russ).

49. Bresser-Pereira, L.C., Araujo, E.C., Costa Peres, S. 2020, An alternative to the middle-income trap, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, no. 52, p. 294--312. doi: 10.1016/j.strue- co.2019.11.007.

50. Wiborg, 0.N., Hansen, M.N. 2018, The Scandinavian model during increasing inequality: Recent trends in educational attainment, earnings and wealth among Norwegian siblings, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, no. 56, p. 53--63. doi: 10.1016/j. rssm.2018.06.006.

51. Benesova, I., Smutka, L. 2016, The Post-soviet Countries -- Development and Structure of Economy: Is there any Potential for Future Regional Integration? Procedia -- Social and Behavioral Sciences, no. 220, p. 30--39. doi: 10.1016/j. sbspro.2016.05.466.

52. Cutrini, E. 2019, Economic integration, structural change, and uneven development in the European Union, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, no. 50, p. 102 -- 113. doi: 10.1016/j. strueco.2019.06.007.

53. Siksnelyte, I., Zavadskas, E.K., Bausys, R., Streimikiene, D. 2019, Implementation of EU energy policy priorities in the Baltic Sea Region countries: Sustainability assessment based on neutrosophic MULTIMOORA method, Energy Policy, no. 125, p. 90--102. doi: 10.1016/j.en- pol.2018.10.013.

54. Studzieniecki, T. 2016, The Development of Cross-border Cooperation in an EU Macroregion -- A Case Study of the Baltic Sea Region, Procedia Economics and Finance, no. 39, p. 235--241. doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30318-5.

55. Rokkan, S., Urwin, D.W. 1982, Introduction: Centres and Peripheries in Western Europe. In: Rokkan, S., Urwin, D.W. (eds.) The Politics of territorial Identity. Studies in European Regionalism, SAGE publications, London, Beverly Hills, New Delhi, p. 5.

56. Timofeev, I.N. 2014, Mirovoi poryadok ili mirovaya anarkhiya? Vzglyad na sovremennuyu sistemu mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenii [World order or world anarchy? A look at the modern system of international relations]. In: Ivanov, I.S. (ed.) Workbook no. 18, Moscow, 48 p. (in Russ).

57. Minarci'kova, E. 2016, EU-China cooperation on regional policy, Perspectives in Science, no. 7, p. 30--38. doi: 10.1016/j. pisc.2015.11.007.

58. Gustafsson, A. 2018, The Baltic Sea Region Border Control Cooperation (BSRBCC) and border management in the Baltic Sea region: A case study, Marine Policy, no. 98, p. 309--316. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2018.09.028.

Размещено на Allbest.ru