Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators

Ludmila Donchevskaia

UDC

332.05

VAK Russia

5.2.3

ORGANIZATIONAL AND ECONOMIC MODEL FOR COMBATING THE SHADOW ECONOMY, MONEY LAUNDERING, AND CORRUPTION: PRINCIPLES AND KEY INDICATORS Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators

АА Аа

Published in Economic policy and national security · Pages 32–46 · Rubric: Countering money laundering, corruption, and the Shadow Economy

Received: 10.03.2026 Accepted: 20.04.2026 Published: 30.05.2026

Authors

Ludmila Donchevskaia

ORCID

Ludmila Donchevskaia

Academic degree: candidate of economic sciences

Science rang: docent

St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia Associate Professor · Department of Economic Security · Russian Federation · St. Petersburg

ORCID

ABSTRACT

Introduction. Today, the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption are the criminal phenomena that pose the most serious threat to the foundations of the state. They devalue the work of tens of millions of people, hold back social progress, and weaken the country’s economic – and hence defence – potential. This study aims to improve the effectiveness of the current organisational and economic model designed to counteract the criminalisation of the economy. Methods. This study is based on data from the economic security units of the Russian Ministry of the Interior for the post-Soviet period (1992-2025). The analysis focuses on three key areas: the number of recorded crimes, the total established financial losses, and the number of identified offenders. Results. The study reveals high volatility and unstable dynamics in key indicators within the current organisational and economic model for counteracting the criminalisation of the economy. A prolonged decline in recorded crimes during the post-reform period is interpreted as evidence that the model is approaching a critical state. The article proposes an updated organisational and economic model of social protection based on the primacy of state interest. This model conforms to three principles: (1) terminological precision - accuracy, clarity, and expressiveness - which permits the rehabilitation of the term “struggle” (bor’ba) and its reintroduction into the official name of economic security units; (2) a human-centered approach prioritizing values and meanings over technology and tools; and (3) a legal presumption of asset confiscation, granting the state the right to restore confiscation as a criminal penalty.

KEYWORDS

shadow economy, economic security, counteraction, struggle, term, principles, confiscation of property

1. Vishnevetsky Kirill V., and Sergey V. Trofimenko. 2013. “O terminah «Bor'ba» i «Protivodejstvie» v ugolovno-pravovoj leksike” [“On the terms "Struggle" and "Counteraction" in criminal law vocabulary”] (In Russ.). Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya [Theory and practice of social development], no. 3 (March):225–30.

2. Vorobyov, Gennady G. 1975. Man– to–man 192. (In Russ.). Moscow : Molodaya Gvardiy.

3. Golovin, Boris N. 1970. “O nekotoryh zadachah i tematike issledovaniya nauchnoj i nauchno-tekhnicheskoj terminologii” [“On some tasks and research topics of scientific and scientific-technical terminology”] (In Russ.). Uchenye zapiski Gor'kovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Seriya lingvisticheskaya Scientific Notes of Gorky State University. Linguistic Series] 114:17–26.

4. Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1990. The Sovereign 79. (In Russ.). Moscow : Planeta.

5. Paramonov, Ivan V. 1983. Learn to manage: Thoughts and experience of an old business executive 168. (In Russ.).

6. Frolova, Olga V., and Tatyana V. Volkova, Nikolay V. Myachin (eds.). 2020. Protivodejstvie kriminalizacii i korrupcii v sisteme obespecheniya ekonomicheskoj bezopasnosti gosudarstva [Countering criminalization and corruption in the system of ensuring the economic security of the state] 216. (In Russ.). Saint Petersburg : Izdatel'stvo Sankt-Peterburgskogo universitetata MVD Rossii.4th ed. Moscow : Economics.

7. Sabitova, Elena Yu. 2021. “O neobhodimosti vklyucheniya v sistemu nakazanij konfiskacii imushchestva za hishcheniya, korrupcionnye, nalogovye i inye prestupleniya v sfere ekonomicheskoj deyatel'nosti” [“On the need to include in the system of penalties confiscation of property for embezzlement, corruption, tax and other crimes in the field of economic activity”] (In Russ.). Vestnik CHelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Pravo [Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State University. Series: Law] 6, no. 4 (December):42–8. https://doi.org/10.47475/2618-8236-2021-16408

8. Safin, Ural Z. 2015. “Istoriya bor'by v SSSR s hishcheniyami socialisticheskoj sobstvennosti (k 70-letiyu OBHSS /DEB)” [“Analysis of the state of economic crime in Russia during the years of crises and reforms”] (In Russ.). Istoriko-ekonomicheskie issledovaniya [Business in Law. Economics and Law Journal], no. 5 (October):231–6.

9. Tishkov, Sergey V., and Rais R. Alaberdeev, Yuri V. Latov. 2007. “Istoriya bor'by v SSSR s hishcheniyami socialisticheskoj sobstvennosti (k 70-letiyu OBHSS/DEB)” [“The history of the struggle in the USSR against theft of socialist property (on the 70th anniversary of the OBKHSS/DEB)”] (In Russ.). Istoriko-ekonomicheskie issledovaniya [Historical and economic research] 8, no. 1 (March):51–80.

10. Emerson, Harrington. 1972. The Twelve Principles of Productivity 223. (In Russ.). Moscow : Ekonomika.

11. Abdykadyrova, Gulzhan I. 2021. “Special purpose language.” Humanitarian and Socio-Economic Sciences Journal 6, no. 17 (November):57–60. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/79c35

12. Bullock, Karen. 2010. “The confiscation investigation: investigating the financial benefit made from crime.” Policing 4, no. 1 (January):7–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/pap030

13. Hapsari, Sulvia T., and Abdul Madjid, Nurini Aprilianda. 2022. “Confiscation Of Assets In Economic Crime.” Journal of Social Science 3. no. 5 (September):1089–100. https://doi.org/10.46799/jss.v3i5.425

14. Kahler, Miles. 2004. “Economic security in an era of globalization: definition and provision.” The Pacific Review 17, no. 4 (January):485–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951274042000326032

15. Zald, Mayer N., and Bert Useem. 2017. “Movement and countermovement interaction: Mobilization, tactics, and state involvement.” In: Zald M. N., McCarthy J. D. (eds.) Social movements in an organizational society : Collected Essays 247–72. London, UK : Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315129648-10

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

JATS XML

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Creative Commons

GOST

Donchevskaia L. V. Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators // . 2026. pp. 32-46. (Date of access 19.08.2026).

MLA

Ludmila Donchevskaia. "Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators." (2026): 32-46.

APA

Donchevskaia L. V. (2026). Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators. , 32-46.

Chicago

Ludmila Donchevskaia. "Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators." , no. (2026): 32-46.

WIKI

{{cite journal | author = Donchevskaia L. V. | title = Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators | journal = | year = 2026 | pages = 32-46 }}

Copy

Export: BibTeX EndNote RefMan RusMARC

ORGANIZATIONAL AND ECONOMIC MODEL FOR COMBATING THE SHADOW ECONOMY, MONEY LAUNDERING, AND CORRUPTION: PRINCIPLES AND KEY INDICATORS Organizational and economic model for combating the shadow economy, money laundering, and corruption: principles and key indicators

Confirmation