Towards digital society management and ‘capitalism 4.0’ in contemporary Russia

The study investigates how the emergence and management of a digital society affect Russia’s evolving model of state capitalism and its future trajectory under Industry 4.0. It situates Russia’s state-dominated sectors and strategic national champions within the global technological revolution and asks under what conditions digital advances translate into improved human wellbeing and economic growth. The central hypothesis is that, unlike OECD economies where digitalization tends to support and accelerate capitalism, the influence of the digital society on Russian capitalism is complex and contradictory. The paper aims to quantify these effects for key manifestations of capitalism (private property prevalence, profitability, economic freedom, trade openness, and global competitiveness) and to propose a management framework and policy levers to optimize “capitalism 4.0” in Russia.

The theoretical basis draws on literature on the digital economy, Industry 4.0, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and digital society, including work on digital welfare provision, cybersecurity, data access inequalities, and societal risks. It also engages modern capitalist theory (e.g., creative, customer, and sustainable capitalism; Capitalism 4.0) and emphasizes human and knowledge capital. From synthesizing prior work, the authors identify key manifestations of capitalism to be assessed: dominance of private property, profit conditions (balanced financial results), deregulation/economic liberalism (Index of Economic Freedom), free trade/competition (trade openness), and openness/adaptability to innovation (Global Competitiveness Index). The review highlights gaps regarding how digital society metrics map onto these manifestations in emerging economies like Russia, where digital adoption and state capitalism interact in distinctive ways.

Design: Quantitative analysis for Russia, 2010–2020. Data sources: Rosstat (Regions of Russia), Institute of Scientific Communications (balanced financial results), The Heritage Foundation (Index of Economic Freedom), The Global Economy/World Bank (trade openness), World Economic Forum (Global Competitiveness Index), HSE (Digital Economy report), IMD (World Digital Competitiveness), and official reports on information society indicators. Variables: Dependent variables—(y1) balanced financial result of companies’ activities (RUB million); (y2) Index of Economic Freedom (points); (y3) Global Competitiveness Index (points). Independent variables—(x1) share of households with Internet access (%); (x2) digital knowledge in society (IMD, points); (x3) share of population using the Internet without information security problems (% of Internet users); (x4) share of population aged 15–74 using the Internet daily (%). Analytical steps: (1) Correlation analysis between each manifestation of capitalism and digital society indicators (2010–2020). (2) Multiple linear regression models for y1, y2, y3 on x1–x4. Model statistics (Table 2): R² (multiple R determination) of 0.9501 (y1), 0.9479 (y2), 0.9965 (y3); Significance F values 0.00342, 0.00387, and 0.000001 respectively; F-observed 13.91, 13.27, and 215.53, all exceeding F-critical (4.53) at α=0.05; models satisfy Gauss–Markov conditions. Key coefficients: y1 increases by RUB 120,245.15 for a +1 pp change in x3 and by RUB 547,868.03 for a +1 pp change in x4; y2 increases by 1.15 points per +1 point in x2; y3 increases by 5.40 points per +1 point in x2. (3) Policy optimization via Excel Solver (simplex method) subject to constraints (not below 2020 values; percentage variables ≤100) to maximize 2024 targets for y1–y3 by choosing x1–x4.

• Correlations with households’ Internet access (x1): private companies share 39.56% (weak), balanced financial result 57.61%, Index of Economic Freedom −69.96% (negative), trade openness 16.59%, Global Competitiveness Index 61.73%.
• Correlations with digital knowledge (x2): private companies share −12.88% (negative), balanced financial result 86.42%, Index of Economic Freedom 93.65%, trade openness 12.29% (weak), Global Competitiveness Index 94.18%.
• Correlations with no information security problems (x3): private companies share 21.91% (weak), balanced financial result 71.19%, Index of Economic Freedom 78.57%, trade openness 11.40% (weak), Global Competitiveness Index 72.22%.
• Correlations with daily Internet use (x4): private companies share −2.70% (negative), balanced financial result 85.43%, Index of Economic Freedom 89.62%, trade openness −4.20% (negative), Global Competitiveness Index 86.74%.
• Averaged correlations (across x1–x4): private companies share 11.47% (weak), balanced financial result 75.16%, Index of Economic Freedom 82.95%, trade openness 0.72% (weak), Global Competitiveness Index 78.72%.
• Interpretation: Digital society indicators in Russia strongly align with profitability (balanced financial results), economic freedom, and global competitiveness, but exhibit little to no relationship with private ownership prevalence and trade openness.
• Regression insights: +1 point in digital knowledge (x2) associates with +1.15 points in the Index of Economic Freedom (y2) and +5.40 points in GCI (y3). +1 pp in secure Internet use (x3) and daily Internet use (x4) associate with increases in balanced financial results (y1) by RUB 120,245.15 and RUB 547,868.03 respectively.
• Optimization (to 2024): From 2020 baselines, feasible targets are balanced financial results rising from RUB 23.35 million to RUB 26.52 million (+13.58%), Index of Economic Freedom from 61.00 to 68.74 (+12.69%), and GCI from 67.82 to 98.65 (+45.47%), implying an aggregate increase of 71.75% across manifestations. Required digital society targets: digital knowledge from 75.96 to 83.00 (+9.26%), population without information security problems from 71.01% to 100% (+36.96%), daily Internet use from 88.68% to 95% (+7.13%); households’ Internet access can remain unchanged for these objectives.

Findings support the hypothesis that digital society development in Russia has a differentiated and sometimes contradictory impact on capitalism’s manifestations. Strong positive links with profitability, economic freedom, and competitiveness indicate digitalization can be a lever for optimizing state capitalism outcomes, while weak or negative links with private ownership prevalence and trade openness suggest structural features of Russian capitalism are not readily shifted by digital uptake alone. Policy levers derived from regression and optimization emphasize improving cybersecurity for users, encouraging regular Internet use, and raising digital knowledge via accessible literacy programs. The COVID-19 period accelerated digital adoption (e-government use, distance learning, telemedicine) and strengthened the salience of cybersecurity and legal frameworks, further embedding digital society features that can bolster “capitalism 4.0.” By targeting the identified digital indicators, Russia can translate digitalization into improved economic freedom and global competitiveness without necessitating rapid changes in ownership structures or trade openness.

Russia’s unique model of capitalism exhibits limited and contradictory sensitivity to digital society development across different manifestations. Digitalization cannot, by itself, increase private ownership prevalence or trade openness, but it can significantly enhance profitability, economic freedom, and global competitiveness when effectively managed. Quantitative optimization suggests that by 2024, aggregate manifestations could grow by 71.75% if digital knowledge, secure Internet usage, and daily usage levels reach specified targets. These insights provide actionable quantitative landmarks and policy implications to manage digital society development in support of Russia’s “capitalism 4.0.” Future efforts should also consider complementary enablers such as digital infrastructure expansion, broader e-government usage, and fostering high-tech enterprises.

• Not all manifestations of capitalism are influenced by digital society indicators: the share of private companies and trade openness show weak or no dependence and were excluded from optimization.
• Digital society is not the sole driver of capitalism’s evolution in Russia; outcomes also hinge on digital infrastructure, broader e-government adoption, and creation of high-tech businesses, among other factors.
• The analysis focuses on Russia over 2010–2020 and on a selected set of indicators; results may not generalize beyond this scope or capture all relevant institutional dynamics.