Comparing the New Economic Policy (NEP) of the 1920s and the economic reforms undertaken by Russia in the 1990s can lead to a better understanding of economic reforms, according to Yury Goland, lead researcher, Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, and member, Advisory Council, Committee on Budget and Taxation, Russian State Duma. Speaking at a recent Kennan Institute seminar, Goland asserted that it is vital for policymakers to find a balance between state regulation and market relations during times of societal transition.

Both NEP and post-Soviet Russian economic policy were attempts to revitalize economies that had recently suffered dramatic collapses, Goland noted. Although both resulted in the state becoming more deeply involved in economic affairs, he stated that NEP was more successful than the "shock therapy" of the 1990s in boosting economic output and achieving financial stabilization. The reasons for this relative success included NEP's more flexible approach for combining economic growth with financial stability and its taking into account of local Russian conditions. Goland contrasted this approach to post-Soviet policy, which he said was often formed on the recommendation of foreign advisors and stressed privatization rather than increasing production.

The transition to the market is a necessary condition for creating optimal economic efficiency, but it is not sufficient on its own, according to Goland. A combination of state regulation and market relations is necessary to ensure the proper functioning of the economy, especially during periods of transition, he said. At the same time, excessive state intervention in the economy is dangerous. Reformers must have a sense of proportion, he cautioned. Democratic procedures are necessary in any situation to help coordinate interests, at least at the top levels of state management, Goland claimed. Finally, he emphasized that economists should make use of domestic solutions in order to give themselves a more adequate picture.