Abstract. For the first time in history, the human mind has become a direct productive force, fos-tering the development of the "knowledge economy". However, the knowledge use alone does not re-flect the true content of the latest scientific and economic revolution, because all the revolutionary transformations since the middle of the 18th century have been characterized by the development of knowledge and scientific innovations. The aim of the article is to explore the revolutionary aspects of the current scientific and economic relations and to reveal the related challenges that need to be ad-dressed. In order to achieve the stated aim, the authors use the methods of quantitative cluster analy-sis based on the classical principles of isomorphism and entropy.

Keywords: isomorphism, entropy, scientific and economic relations, simulation model, panel anal-ysis.

1. Introduction. The development of information technologies, which connect new knowledge to the accumulated information, has played a significant role in shaping the current scientific and eco-nomic relations. For the first time in history, the human mind, as a decisive element of the production system, has also become a direct productive force, fostering the development of the "knowledge economy" (Sokol, 2003). However, the knowledge use alone does not reflect the true content of the latest scientific and economic revolution, because since the middle of the 18th century, all revolutionary transformations in the economic sphere have been characterized by the development of knowledge and scientific innovations. According to many experts, they were of crucial importance for almost all spheres of the economy and public life. It is noteworthy that they were accompanied by an unprecedented sta-ble growth in household incomes. For almost two centuries, the average per capita income in the world economy has grown almost 10 times, despite a nearly 6-fold growth of world population (Maddison, 2003, pp. 256–262, Tables 8a and 8c).

It was assumed that the availability of statistical data, transparency with better accountability and the decision-making based on the analysis of large databases would lead to an effective reallocation of resources, stronger public confidence, higher security and safety, more even and balanced economic development and lower unemployment and poverty. It was also expected that the main goals of this revolutionary transformation would be achieved: increase in household incomes and improvement of labour productivity.

2. Research Materials and Methods. The aim of the article is to explore the revolutionary as-pects of the current scientific and technological relations and to reveal the related challenges that need to be addressed. In order to achieve the stated aim, we use the systemic methods of quantitative cluster analysis based on the classical principles of isomorphism and entropy. In recent years, isomorphism has become an important general scientific notion used to describe the relationship between theory and reality or the information processing in the process of cognition and to present conditions for validity of reasoning by analogy.

Today’s world economy is isomorphic, which means that different countries tend to establish the same scientific and economic relations under identical conditions, which are accompanied by a high level of uncertainty of random variables. The current situation fully corresponds to the classical defini-tion of entropy. In order to explore the revolutionary aspects of the current scientific and economic relations and their specific features, we performed comparative observations and a comparative analy-sis of the technological revolutions in the past and the current scientific and economic realities. The focus is mainly on the parallel between the causes of the Great Depression and the currently formed new scientific and economic relations. There is a need for an urgent regulation of the global relations shaped by the development of information technologies, as they already now create serious precondi-tions for a new, even deeper crisis and can even lead to a new world war.

The new advanced technologies are not just practical tools — they are truly revolutionary pro-cesses, shaping economic and political relations characterised by extraordinary transparency, which affect not only social and personal contacts, but also create a broad accessible platform for the produc-tion and sale of social products both in the real sector of the economy and in financial markets. The ex-istence of a stable and close relationship between the social processes and the production and redistri-bution spheres allows us to call this transformation a scientific and economic revolution leading to the emergence of entirely new relations. Focusing the economy on knowledge and information, the human mind gradually paved the way for the human-machine convergence (artificial intelligence), and in the early 1970s, the accumulated knowledge about genes and DNA laid the technological foundation of genetic engineering. People's lifestyle changed with the advent of devices designed for information pro-cessing, cumulative communication and the information transfer to the next generation (Castells, 1996–1998).

In just two decades, from the 1970s to the mid-1990s, the new information technologies spread around the world at lightning speed. Such massive diffusion of technologies was largely supported by the appearance of the microprocessor (a computer on a chip) invented in 1971 by Ted Hoff, who worked in Silicon Valley. His invention opened new opportunities for the information processing. That was a "revolution in revolution". Further specialization and lower prices for more powerful chips allowed using them in almost all economic sectors: household appliances (from washing machines to microwave ovens), credit cards, travel cards, and even one-way tickets. Apple appeared in 1975, Microsoft — in 1978, and in 1981 IBM presented their own version of the microcomputer named "personal computer" (PC), which really became the first main computer used not only at work but also at home, and not only for professional needs but also for personal activities.

However, we should recognize that not all innovations have been successful. One of such fail-ures was a case of Genentech developments financed by venture capitalists and such pharmaceutical giants as Hoffmann-La Roche and Merck, which lost a considerable amount of their capital invest-ments. Their experience showed that the approaches successfully used in the IT sphere did not result in similar breakthroughs in biotechnology, because projects in this specific business require significantly higher investments over longer periods, exceeding possibilities of venture capitalists as the main source of funding for innovations and failing to provide high return on investment (IRR). Another ex-ample is the situation with nano-technology centres, which not only raised financing from venture cap-italists but also attracted considerable investments from governmental agencies. According to many experts, one of the causes of the 2008 global financial crisis was an unintended result of such invest-ments, with the huge amount of financial resources being frozen, thus slowing down the movement of capital.

3. Results. The revolutionary development of information technologies contributed to the emer-gence of a new environment, in which innovations and their applicability were tested by identifying flaws and errors in them to prevent their occurrence in the next iteration. Although that environment was networking in nature, it required and still requires a territorial concentration of research centres, higher education institutions, innovative technology companies and a network of the suppliers of related goods and services (including venture capitalists). When the environment is consolidated, as it was in the technology hubs of Silicon Valley or Boston’s Route 128, it begins to generate its own knowledge network, attracting investment and talent from all over the world. The centralization of re-search and technology expertise, institutions, enterprises and experienced professionals has created the crucible of innovation in the information age. Most of the world's technology centres are located in metropolitan areas, which confirms that it is not enough to have proper institutional and cultural envi-ronment for the technological development, as it primarily requires synergies based on expertise and information. The synergies are directly related to the rapid development of the advanced information technologies with a web-like structure, which is still in the process of formation.

4. Discussion. It should be noted that ups and downs of economic cycles have occurred more than once in the past and will continue to occur in future (Coyle, 2012, p.7). To understand the current processes in today's reality, we have to remember about the events that took place in social life earlier, even in the distant past. For example, the current situation in the financial and banking sphere exactly rep-licates the relations typical for the late Middle Ages, when the first giro banks were established for non-cash clearing operations. The money deposits were controlled by a group of moneylenders, who issued their own securities for clearing operations and even used to give loans to the state (Grossman, 2010). Under such conditions, the first issuing houses were established, which later became national central banks (Beattie, 2021). Today we are witnessing a kind of hybrid situation resulting from the introduction of new technologies (blockchain), as there are hundreds of private cryptocurrency funds, and the central banks have not yet established control over them and do not have tools to regulate the circulation of these currencies. Moreover, cryptocurrency start-ups are currently attracting millions of dollars of investment. In particular, NFT marketplace OpenSea has raised $300 million, and its market value has increased from $1.5 billion to $13.3 billion ("United States Venture Capital Investors", 2022).

The beginning of the 20th century was characterized by a number of "epoch-making events" in the history of the United States and the whole world, including World War I, mass migration of popu-lation, racial unrest, rapid urbanization, establishment of giant industrial holdings and emergence of such new technologies as electricity, machinery, radio and cinema. All these processes were accompa-nied by new social phenomena, such as alcohol prohibition, birth control and sexual revolution, which also changed the people’s way of life. During the same period, the advertising market and consumer accreditation systems also appeared. However, the economic growth came to a dramatic end with the start of the Great Depression of 1929–1939. We should keep in mind that not all the causes of the Great Depression have been identified, but many experts consider that the economy had not fully adapted to the new economic relations (Duignan, n.d.).

Capitalism was no longer a self-regulating system. When the economic crisis began in 1929, the excess of capital on the market was not regulated at the national level. The market developed sponta-neously and uncontrollably, and the lack of regulation was one of the main causes of the Great Depres-sion. As a result, fraud was committed and financial bubbles swelled and burst, causing great damage not only to the American economy.

Though the USA introduced the first anti-monopoly law as early as in 1890 ("Sherman Anti- Trust Act", 1890), with later modifications to the legislation with the Clayton Antitrust Act and other laws, the role of major corporations was growing, so President Theodore Roosevelt noted that the existing regu-latory mechanisms were falling behind, and new comprehensive mechanisms were needed. Later Pres-ident Wilson commented that the strong continued crushing the weak. CB Insights chief executive Anand Sanwal expressed almost the same idea in his interview to Reuters in January 2021, "What we're seeing is a 'rich get richer' phenomenon where successful, high momentum technology companies are vacuuming up most of the financing" (Lee, 2021).

We should keep in mind that venture capitalists participated in financing many of current pro-jects and provided most of the products of the new revolution, which were born with the support of venture capital in small and medium-sized businesses rather than in industrial giants.

Today, more than ever, it is appropriate to recall the comment of Andy Haldane, Executive Di-rector of Financial Stability at the Bank of England, "I think one of the great errors we as economists made was that we started believing the assumptions of economics, and saying things that made no intellectual sense. The hope was that, by basing models on mathematics and particular assumptions about ‘optimising’ behaviour, they would become immune to changes in policy. But we forgot the key part, which is that the models are only true if the assumptions that underpin those models are also true. And we started to believe that what were assumptions were actually a description of reality..." (Davies, 2012).

One of such constructs based on simulation models is the monetary policy developed by nation-al central banks for the following purposes: regulation of inflation and economic growth rates, maxim-izing employment, timely response to cyclical fluctuations in the economy, maintenance of the bal-ance of payments and monetary regulation (Investopedia Team, 2021).

Until 1933, the amount of paper money issued in the United States was equal to the amount of gold in their reserves. However, the rapid market development and the emergence of new goods re-quired additional financing, but the country lacked money, which became one of the causes of the Great Depression and led to the instability of the US economy and bankruptcy of many companies. That was the reason for abandoning the gold standard in the United States in 1933, with a transition to a flexible exchange rate, which made it possible to increase the amount of money in circulation by printing more paper money (Lioudis, 2022) . As can be seen in Figure 1, now there is also a lot of money in circulation, and the economic growth rates are low, which is one of the preconditions for the growing inflation rates. In almost every country in the world, inflation is now at its highest level in many years. 

Figure 1. Monetary aggregate M2 (total of cash and non-cash liquid assets) in different countries

According to the IMF forecast, the global GDP growth in 2021 was expected to be 5.9%, with 6% in the US, 6.8% in the UK, more than 5% in the Euro zone countries, 8% in China and 9.5% in In-dia, but the Covid pandemic hindered the growth. Besides, in 2021 there was an unprecedented rise in prices. For example, the US inflation rate exceeded 6% for the first time since 1990, and the inflation rate in the Euro zone countries achieved the level of 4.1%, which became maximum in 13 years. In September 2021, the annual inflation exceeded the target levels set by the central banks of 39 coun-tries. Prices were growing in excess of the target value in Zambia, Turkey, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Bela-rus, Brazil and Armenia.

According to the IMF forecast, the global GDP growth in 2022 is expected to be 4.9%, with 5.2% in the US, 5% in the UK, 4.4% in the Euro zone countries, 5.6% in China and 8.5% in India. Fig. 2 illus-trates the trend of US GDP development over the past 15 years (Fernando, 2022). It is obvious that the GDP growth has been slowing since 2019. 

Figure 2. US GDP Development in 2007–2022

Is such GDP pace high enough to address household income problems and reduce poverty and unemployment?

The impact of GDP growth on these phenomena has been in the focus of research performed by leading scholars in different countries. For example, R.H. Adams in his article "Economic Growth, Ine-quality and Poverty: Estimating the Growth Elasticity of Poverty" estimates growth elasticity of poverty based on the poverty line of $1.08 per person per day. Adams believes that the relationship between poverty and economic growth is only valid for the poorest countries, and it depends on growth elastici-ty of poverty, that is, how much poverty declines in percentage terms with the real GDP growth. If the elasticity is -5.5, this means that poverty declines by 5.5% for each 1% growth measured in GDP per capita. In the countries with the elasticity of the mean income to GDP of -1.2, it is statistically insignifi-cant (Adams, 2004).

W. Enders and G.A. Hoover in their study, based on the use of regression analysis for exploring the US data for 1961–1996, find out that 1% increase in GDP resulted in poverty decline by 0.19%. It is noteworthy that they get almost the same result using different non-linear methods to analyse the same data: poverty reduction of 0.16% for 1% GDP growth (Enders & Hoover, 2003).

W.H. Locke Anderson studies income distribution in different population groups as an indicator of economic growth and household income, using the statistical analysis of the panel data contained in the US Census Bureau publications for 1947–1960. He establishes that 1% increase in per capita na-tional income led to 1.078% increase in household income. At the same time, the indicator for the non-white population was 1.55%, for urban population — 0.98%, and for farmers — 2.49% (Locke Anderson, 1964).

P. Agrawal in his study based on the Kazakhstan province-level data for 2000–2002 considers the relation between economic growth and poverty alleviation (Agrawal, 2008). Using fixed-effects panel models, he reveals that 1% increase in GDP per capita is strongly associated with 0.11% decline in poverty. However, adjusted for other related variables, the association is less significant, and the poverty decline is only 0.09%. This study does not definitely confirm that there is direct connection between GDP growth, unemployment rates and population income growth.

The research performed by Yuka Takeda (2009) to reveal the relationship between economic growth and poverty reduction in Russia is of particular interest for our purposes. His study was based on the 1995–2002 data for the regions of Russia. He considers the elasticity of poverty to real per capita GRP (gross regional product), selected by him as an economic growth indicator. He finds out that 1% growth of the real per capita GRP is necessary to achieve the poverty reduction indicator of -0.367%. This indicator refers to the entire period from 1995 to 2002, but the elasticity of poverty to growth be-fore the 1998 crisis was -0.607, and after the crisis it went down to -0.195 (Takeda, 2009, p. 6), which means that the GRP growth is less associated with decline in poverty after the economic crisis.

A number of the studies on the relationship between economic growth and poverty alleviation refer to the revealing conclusions in the work by D. Dollar and A. Kraay (2001). They test the opinion of many researchers that economic growth primarily leads to an income increase among the richest rather than poorest strata of population. In their study, they use the sample of about 1000 observations based on the data for 137 countries in the period from 1950 to 1999. They measure mean income as real per capita GDP at purchasing power parity (PPP) and define the poor as the poorest 20% of the population, measuring their mean income as the share of income earned by the poorest quintile times mean income, divided by 0.2. They conclude that the income elasticity in the poorest quintile is approximately equal to 1, i.e. 1% economic growth on average leads to the same increase in the income of the poorest quin-tile.

Thus, we see that there are no convincing data on the relationship between economic growth and the level of poverty, unemployment and incomes of the population, and the estimates for such de-pendence in different studies vary in the range of 0.11 to 1.55. Moreover, such estimates do not take into account rising prices, pandemic effects, geopolitical uncertainty and the negative effects of natural disasters. We should also note that high unemployment and the rapid growth of immigration were among the causes of the Great Depression.

On the other hand, if we take into account the current geopolitical situation, with continuously growing migration flows due to recent wars (Karabakh, Afghanistan, Ukraine–Russia), then the reasons for the growth of poverty and unemployment become understandable, as well as the decrease in eco-nomic growth in almost all countries, resulting from such processes.

According to data published by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), more than 84 million people were forced to leave their permanent place of residence. Despite the pandemic-related restrictions on movement, the number of people displaced from their homes due to wars, conflicts or repressions rose to an all-time high in 2021, with some 783 million people living in extreme poverty (UNHCR, n.d.).

Therefore, in the current situation, there are very few grounds for optimistic forecasts on reach-ing the projected level of the world economy's GDP. However, they are still used for the decisions on the development of human and financial resources and the sustainable development strategy. The on-going processes lead to a deepening of distrust and uncertainty in almost all population groups, which negatively affects the efficiency of even the most powerful international organizations. Some sources, including highly reputable World Health Organization, begin doubting the veracity of the official death tolls from the COVID-19 of 1.8 million. In the end of 2020, the WHO stated that the total deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic were preliminary estimated to be at least 3 million, which is 1.2 million more than the officially reported data. Moreover, the WHO experts developed a calculation model for each country and came to the conclusion that in 2020 the number of excess deaths in the Americas was 1.34 to 1.46 million and in Europe — 1.11 to 1.21 million, which is respectively 60% and 50% more than the officially reported data. This is the level of understatement in the developed countries, so, taking into account the deplorable situation with official statistics in many developing countries, where there are no pension funds and proper death registration systems, we can understand why the WHO experts consider that the COVID-19 death tolls can be more than 5 million (BBC News Russian, 2021).

If we follow the same logic based on the principle of isomorphism, we can also question the reli-ability of demographic data from different countries. Meanwhile, reliable projections of world popula-tion are essential for understanding how countries should allocate the planet's exhaustible natural re-sources and the available funding. For example, the projections on where and how many children will be born can determine where to allocate health and education resources, and the estimates of a migra-tory inflow of workforce to a particular region can contribute to shaping an efficient labour market.

The analysis of 1970 crisis has shown that the main cause of the crisis was not the rise in oil prices, but the fact that the public sector could no longer indefinitely expand its sales markets; there-fore, it had to increase the tax burden on capital or stimulate inflation by increasing money supply and the public debt. To enter new markets, countries needed to create an efficient trading network with de-veloped communications that would contribute to an increase in production and trade, ensuring both high capital mobility and improved profitability of businesses, as well as favourable environment for the free competition. All necessary conditions for achieving these goals were created through decentrali-zation of international markets with new information technologies. However, the level of competitive-ness of national economies becomes a crucial factor in this environment.

According to the classical definition, competitiveness of a national economy is the level of the country's economy that allows the country, in free market conditions, to produce goods and services meeting demands of the global markets and at the same time to increase the real incomes of its citizens. While there are no mechanisms for accurate assessment of the level of free competition in a particular country, international organizations determine it for competitiveness ratings based on two indices: the legitimacy of state power and the level of corruption. Competing in today's economic and political condi-tions means strengthening the country's position through negotiations in the environment where all po-litical forces unite their strategies around one interconnected system. All these factors result in a signif-icant politicization of world economy. Today countries compete for markets in a controlled market environment, and, as a result, cold wars between countries have been replaced with global economic sanctions that undermine the economic potential of the affected countries.

On the other hand, the rapid, unpredictable and uncontrollable processes related to application of new technologies cause serious concerns in almost all countries of the world. In particular, a matter of concern is the creation and introduction of intelligent machines equipped with fast and powerful technological devices, because the relations and cooperation between the human workforce and such machines have not been regulated in world economies. The competition between them is unequal, which contributes to unemployment growth in almost every country in the world, depending on their level of development (Castells et al., 2017).

At the end of August 2019, economists came to the conclusion that it was necessary to revise the existing fiscal policies, because there was a need to introduce new fiscal tools for taxes on robots. Their reasoning is based on the fact that corporations are investing more and more in advanced technol-ogies and equipment to reduce costs, and the national treasuries, meanwhile, are spending millions of dollars for the support of scientific and economic progress and the reduction of unemployment ("Leg-islation and taxes…", 2021). Consequently, it is expected that new taxes will appear in addition to those already applied to robots or that the existing tax rates will be increased in the near future. How-ever, in all countries there are some reservations and a certain caution regarding raising the tax threshold for robots, as this may slow down the development of the national innovative economy. The impact of robots has always been of concern for stakeholders both in vertically integrated and industrial sectors because the rapid implementation of robotics, automation, artificial intelligence, natural language pro-cessing and other technologies contributes to the unemployment growth worldwide. Robots work fast-er and more accurately than humans do, and they are cheaper to maintain. In this regard, all countries face a dilemma, and they have not yet identified clear approaches to solving this problem. In 2017, South Korea introduced the world’s first "robot tax", but it has not been actually imposed since then (McGoogan, 2017).

Today legislative and regulatory challenges related to operation of high-tech devices are becom-ing a pressing issue for all countries. In many of them, including the US, robots are still treated as pro-grammable machines fulfilling human will, so it is assumed that robot’s behaviour can be controlled, and its owner or creator is fully responsible for its actions. However, now there are robots and other ma-chines that are programmed to make decisions depending on what is happening around them. They are able to "sense, think, act", and these three properties differ robots from laptops or any other high-tech devices. Consequently, the emergence of new generations of autonomous robots creates a need for proper legal regulation mechanisms for a new type of relations between humans and machines (Calo, 2016).

This issue is of serious concern to many countries. In some of them, draft laws are developed to meet the need to regulate such relations and produce necessary regulatory mechanisms, but they have not been adopted yet. In particular, in February 2017 the European Parliament adopted a resolution on Civil Law Rules on Robotics. The document contains more than a hundred clauses covering various aspects and open issues related to robotics and AI. Among other measures, it is planned to introduce a comprehensive system for registration of advanced robots in the EU ("The EU’s plan…", 2017). The system should provide for categorisation of robots, and each robot should have an individual registra-tion number appearing in a specific register. Thus, any interested parties would be able to find infor-mation about the robot, its manufacturer and owner or the limits of their liability in case of damage to property. Technical support and maintenance should be provided by specialized organizations, which would also take measures to regulate other aspects in this sphere. Moreover, as rightfully noted by the European Parliament, one of the fastest growing areas is robotization of the human body, which fur-ther enhances society's dependence on gadgets. Besides, there can be cases where the original supplier of the devices implanted in the human body cannot carry out maintenance and repair of such implants for whatever reasons, including bankruptcy. In order to regulate such issues, it is proposed to establish independent trusted entities that would provide services to persons carrying vital medical appliances, including their maintenance, repairs and enhancements. Manufacturers should be obliged to supply such independent trusted entities with comprehensive design instructions for the implants, including source codes to be kept in special databases.

The European Parliament recommends establishing an insurance scheme of civil liability for the damage caused by robots, similar to CMTPL insurance of motor vehicles. The higher the level of ma-chine automation, the more difficult it is to identify the person responsible for the damage. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce an obligatory insurance of risks related to robots, which could guarantee compensation for damages to the affected party. There should be also a compensation fund for the inci-dents that have not been covered by an insurance policy. However, today the European Parliament lacks necessary tools to regulate many possible issues of concern. For example, there could be cases when autonomous robots find their employers on their own, negotiate contract terms and decide how to perform them. Now it is not clear which rules should be applied for the liability for damage caused by such autonomous robot. The European Parliament also discusses the moral and psychological aspects of robotics development. Therefore, the annex to the resolution contains "Code of Ethical Conduct" that was created in cooperation with robotics engineers. The code covers two complicated types of rela-tions, combining principles that regulate contradictory issues of human interaction with robots. The principle of autonomy provides for an un-coerced decision about the terms of interaction with robots, and the principle of justice – fair distribution of the benefits associated with robotics. An interesting initiative described in the document is the concept of reversibility, with the function of undoing unde-sired actions that should be integrated into any robot control system.

The European Parliament resolution lays the groundwork for the future comprehensive "Charter on Robotics". The resolution raises the issue of a future legal status of autonomous robots, which could be declared "electronic persons" with the special rights and obligations, including responsibility for compensating any damage they may cause.

We believe that the resolution of the European Parliament is comprehensive and profound, es-pecially with regard to the regulation of interactions between autonomous robots and humans. The adopted resolution does not have the force of law, since only the European Commission has the right of legislative initiative in the EU. Therefore, this document should be treated as a formal appeal to the European Commission with recommendations to take certain measures. Though the European Com-mission is not obliged to take all such recommendations into account, but given the need for a system-atic approach to the control of future human-robot interactions, there is no doubt that a comprehensive law regulating robotics will soon be adopted. Such legislative novelty may become the basis for the laws in other countries and, in general, the future of a new civilization.

5. Conclusion. In conclusion, we would like to note that the current processes and challenges in scientific and economic relations are not fully shaped and are still at the stage of rapid development. The nature of the processes described in the article indicates that this development contributes to the preconditions for a new economic crisis, even more dangerous than the Great Depression. This also applies to the formation of a new cryptocurrency market as a result of the introduction of cryptog-raphy and blockchain technologies. If we consider the above processes in the context of geopolitical tensions, outbreaks of new pandemic diseases and epidemics and frequent natural disasters, the need and importance of regulating new unusual relations become obvious. Otherwise, they can lead to emergence of a new, even deeper crisis than the Great Depression, which can be followed by a new world war.

References

1. Adams, R.H. (2004). Economic growth, inequality and poverty: Estimating the growth elastici-ty of poverty. World Development, vol.32, no.12, pp.1989–2014.
2. Agrawal, P. (2008). Economic growth and poverty reduction: Evidence from Kazakhstan. Asian Development Review, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 90−115.
3. BBC News Russian. (May 21, 2021). VOZ: zhertv koronavirusa v dva-tri raza bol'she, chem glasit statistika [WHO: COVID-19 death toll is two to three times more than official records]. Re-trieved from https://www.bbc.com/russian/news-57193276 
4. Beattie, A. (May 29, 2021). The evolution of banking over time: From the ancient world to today’s digital one. Rev. by Kh. Khartit. Fact checked by Y. Perez. Investopedia. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/articles/07/banking.asp 
5. Calo, R. (March 15, 2016). Robots in American law. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2016-04. Retrieved from http://www.datascienceassn.org/sites/default/files/Robots%20in%20American%20Law.pdf 
6. Castells, M. (1996–1998). The information age: Economy, society, and culture. 3 vols. Blackwell Publ.
7. Castells, M. et al. (Eds.). (2017). Europe’s crises. Polity Press.
8. Coyle, D. (Ed.) (2012). What’s the use of economics? Teaching the dismal science after the crisis. London: London Publishing Partnership.
9. Davies, W. (July 31, 2012). ‘Central banks should admit their mistakes’: an interview with the Bank of England’s Andy Haldane. openDemocracy. Retrieved from https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk /central-banks-should-admit-their-mistakes-says-bank-of-englands-financial/ 
10. Dollar, D. & Kraay, A. (2001). Growth is good for the poor. Policy Research Working Pa-per 2587, World Bank Development Research Group (Macroeconomics and Growth).
11. Duignan, B. (n.d.). Causes of the Great Depression. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/story/causes-of-the-great-depression 
12. Enders, W. & Hoover, G.A. (2003). The effect of robust growth on poverty: a nonlinear analysis. Applied Economics, vol. 35, pp. 1063–1071.
13. Fernando, J. (January 28, 2022). Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Reviewed by M.J. Boyle. Fact checked by P. Rathburn. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gdp.asp
14. Gedik, G. (June 2018). The new tax issue: Taxing robots. Law & Justice Review, year 9, is-sue Retrieved from https://uludag.edu.tr/dosyalar/hukukmalihukuk/gülşen%20gedik%20makaleler%2C/taxing_r obots.pdf
15. Grossman, R.S. (2010). Chapter 2. The origins of banking. In Unsettled account: The evolu-tion of banking in the industrialized world since 1800. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2010, pp. 28-52. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400835256.28 
16. Investopedia Team. (August 29, 2021). Monetary policy. Rev. by T. Brock. Fact checked by P. Rathburn. Investopedia. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/monetarypolicy.asp
17. Lee, J.L. (January 8, 2021). Venture capital hits record high in U.S. in 2020 despite pan-demic. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/business/venture-capital-hits-record-high- us-2020-despite-pandemic-2021-01-08/  
18. Legislation and taxes for robots. (March 23, 2021). TAdviser. Retrieved from https://tadviser.com/index.php/Article:Legislation_and_taxes_for_robots 
19. Lioudis, N. (March 04, 2022). What is the gold standard? Rev. by M.J. Boyle. Fact checked by M. Reeves. Investopedia. Retrieved from https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/gold-standard.asp 
20. Locke Anderson, W.H. (November 1964). Trickling down: The relationship between eco-nomic growth and the extent of poverty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 511–524.
21. Maddison, A. (2003). The world economy: Historical statistics. Paris: Development Centre, OECD.
22. McGoogan, C. (August 09, 2017). South Korea introduces world's first 'robot tax'. The Tele-graph. Retrieved from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/08/09/south- korea-introduces-worlds-first-robot-tax / 
23. Sherman Anti-Trust Act. (1890). National Archives. Retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/sherman-anti-trust-act 
24. Sokol, M. (2003). Regional dimensions of the knowledge economy: Implications for the 'new Europe'. PhD thesis, Newcastle University Centre for Urban and Regional Development.
25. Takeda, Y. (July 2009). Economic growth and its effect on poverty reduction in Russia. Global COE Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series 075, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi Uni-versity, Tokyo, Japan.
26. The EU’s plan for making sure robots don’t bring harm to humans. (February 10, 2017). Panda Security Mediacenter. Retrieved from https://www.pandasecurity.com/en/mediacenter/news/european-parliament-robots/
27. UNHCR. (n.d.) Refugee Population Statistics Database. Retrieved from https://unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/
28. United States venture capital investors. (2022). Crunchbase. Retrieved from https://www.crunchbase.com/hub/united-states-venture-capital-investors