Global Journal of Management and Business Research, B: Economics and Commerce, Volume 21 Issue 5

experts of Boston Consulting Group (2017). According to them, if you double the number of graduates from primary schools with a high level of learning, and consequently, with growing economic success, due to increasing competencies and character qualities, it could be possible to get additional annual GDP growth by a maximum of 1.5%. In Figure 11, the last changes are demonstrated by the GDP curve called 20 years horizon. At the same time, as in the case with school failure, the lag between the introduction of new learning technologies and returns in terms of economic effect has been taken into account (Pilipenko, et al., 2019). For this purpose, the problem of the economic return due to the reduction of the economic failure of general school graduates are differentiated as follows: in two years (2019-2020) the effect of improving preparedness is calculated only for 1/5 of the unsuccessful students because of the increase of the level of their competencies and character qualities. Then, since 2020, the economic effect is calculated as an additional 0.3% of annual GDP growth rate (+1.5% GDP per year are divided into 5). In Figure 11, this change is demonstrated by the GDP curve called 20 years horizon. It could be reasonable to add an extra 0.3% GDP growth each year, beginning from 2020. But the process of reducing school failure of the students and the following economic failure is a very long way, with a large number of problems and various obstacles. Fig. 11 demonstrates the conservative variant of the economic progress. (3) But the above assessments let us present the education system financing as the investment project. For this purpose the table is built (Table 2) to show the GDP (projected) in current prices, the net economic effect of reducing school unsuccessfulness of students (GDP, 10 years horizon) and of decreasing their economic unsuccessfulness (GDP, 20 years horizon) and education financing at the level of 2018 plans (3.6% of GDP) which is unchanged for the entire forecast period. Table 2: Evaluation of the financing of the Russian education system from the standpoint of an investment project for the period 2018-2025 (in billion roubles) Year Forecasting horizon GDP BR (t), billion roubles (1) Extra GDP growth due to the reduction of educational failure of schoolchildren (10 years horizon) (2) Extra GDP growth due to the reduction of economic failure of schoolchildren (20 years horizon) (3) Education system financing as planned for 2018 (3,6% GDP) (4) 2018 98 200.591 1 965.778 2 064.076 3 535.221 2019 103 740.937 2 071.683 3 547.639 3 734.674 2020 109 281.284 2 707.994 3 966.042 3 934.126 2021 114 821.630 2 852.321 4 192.293 4 133.579 2022 120 361.977 3 117.009 4 403.992 4 333.031 2023 125 902.323 3 272.902 4 615.690 4 532.484 2024 131 442.670 3 423.046 4 827.388 4 731.936 2025 136 983.016 3 573.190 5 039.087 4 931.389 Source: Pilipenko, et al., 2019 If considering education financing (4) as net costs, then GDP growth from the reduction of educational unsuccessfulness (3) and of economic unsuccessfulness (2) could be treated as net return on education investments. There have not been given the further authors’ estimates of return on education investment from the view point of an investor, since the data obtained indicate unrealistically high (speculative) profits (significantly more than 100%). In any case these calculations prove that even in conservative scenarios, Russian education can give a tremendous impetus to the growth of the national economy. But this will happen only if we take into account the many “BUTs”, connected, first of all, with formation of high quality education and of adequate socialization. To do this, it is necessary to rethink the approaches to organizing the education system through the prism of the dialectics of interaction of all participants in the educational process, taking into account the dialectics of education and socialization of students, overcoming numerous P С Bs for the purposes of their self-development as intellectually autonomous individuals. Without such fundamental transformation of the approaches to the education and socialization of the younger generation, it hardly makes sense to wait for the knowledge economy construction in the short run in Russia. V. C onclusion According to the President of the European Central Bank Christine Lagarde (WEF, January 2021) 2021 will be accompanied by a very high level of uncertainty – until the moment when there will be a transition to a "new economy". And in this uncertainty, according to the WEF debates, another specificity of the future reality has appeared. The latter is due to the fact Uncertainty of the Post-Covid Future: How will Humanity Solve this Puzzle? © 2021 Global Journals 66 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXI Issue V Version I Year 2021 ( ) B