|
on Post Keynesian Economics |
| By: | Sergio Cesaratto |
| Abstract: | These notes compare the interpretations of pay-as-you-go (PAYG) and fully funded (FF) pension systems and proposals of reform provided by alternative economic theories. After outlining the debate on the intra-temporal or intertemporal nature of PAYG, we will focus on the issues of pension reforms aimed at expanding the funded pillar. We will particularly discuss the issue of the transition from PAYG to funded systems. Mainstream support for reforms has often been based on comparing the rates of return on contributions from the two systems. Criticism of the funded pillar has often been heard from heterodox economists being based on the relative higher risk of capitalization. However, both points of view neglect the issue of transition, as if the choice were in the abstract between PAYG and the FF pillar. In this sense, twenty years ago Cesaratto (2005) contributed to fill a severe gap both in conventional and in post-Keynesian analyses. Other innovative contributions will be noted in passing, such as the outline of a classical surplus-theory of the social state and of the role of public pension-spending in demand-led output theories. |
| Keywords: | Pension reforms, Pay-as-you-go, Fully Funded schemes, Neoclassical theory, Classical-Keynesian approach Jel Classification:E11, E12, E22, H55, E24 |
| Date: | 2026–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:usi:wpaper:948 |
| By: | Zhuo Wang |
| Abstract: | Classical growth theory places physical productivity at the center of economic growth. In modern service-based economies, however, growth increasingly means creating higher-valued products rather than increasing output quantities. This paper develops a theory of value growth based on a socially and institutionally sustained value scale. The framework unifies value creation, finance, and distribution and offers an account of major patterns in US economic history. The proposed framework is intended as a new approach to macroeconomic analysis and policy making. |
| Date: | 2026–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2610.08302 |
| By: | Henman, Josefine; Suter, Manuel |
| Abstract: | This article examines how different policies are perceived by researchers regarding their relevance in supporting the transformation of traditional businesses toward reducing ecological footprints, securing well-being, and increasing social equity. While post-growth scholarship has discussed a wide range of policy proposals, their implications for business transformations remain underexplored. To address this gap, the study combines a quantitative survey of 1, 734 sustainability policy researchers with qualitative focus group discussions with post-growth business scholars. The survey results indicate that the majority of policy instruments are perceived as at least moderately relevant for supporting a business transformation towards post-growth. Descriptive analyses show that respondents with a degrowth work-orientation tend to perceive the instruments as more relevant than growth-indifferent or green growth-oriented respondents, with differences particularly pronounced for more structurally disruptive interventions. The qualitative analysis explores how post-growth business scholars perceive key tensions, barriers, and enabling conditions associated with three previously highly ranked policies: transitioning ownership structures, banning planned obsolescence, and introducing declining resource caps. Two central topics emerge from these discussions: the role of businesses’ profit orientation as a structural factor that may shape responses to policy interventions, and the importance of combining policies in order to address anticipated tensions and wider societal implications. The article bridges post-growth policy and business research by suggesting how different policy instruments and mixes may support business transformations in line with post-growth objectives. |
| Date: | 2026–09–30 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:socarx:n8yf6_v1 |
| By: | Nicolás Caso; Jason Gagnon; Jessica Hagen-Zanker |
| Abstract: | Remittances and social protection programmes have become two of the most important sources of financial support for households across low- and middle-income countries. While both have been linked to household investment and livelihood diversification, little is known about how they jointly influence entrepreneurship. This paper examines whether public transfers, in the form of cash transfers and school feeding support, crowd out or in household entrepreneurship and whether private transfers, in the form of remittances, complement or substitute for public transfers in shaping entrepreneurship. Using household survey data from eight communities in West Africa, we analyse the relationship between social protection, remittances and a range of entrepreneurial outcomes. The results provide little evidence that social protection systematically influences household entrepreneurship or alters the relationship between remittances and business activity. In contrast, remittances remain consistently associated with business creation and entrepreneurial intentions across multiple contexts. These findings suggest that expanding social protection does not diminish the productive role of remittances and highlight the importance of considering public and private sources of household support jointly when assessing policies aimed at promoting entrepreneurship and inclusive economic development. |
| JEL: | F24 L26 I38 O12 H53 |
| Date: | 2026–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rug:rugwps:26/1152 |
| By: | Buchner, Johannes |
| Abstract: | Die dramatischen ökonomischen Folgen des Klimawandels werden in dem in weiten Teilen der Wirt-schaftswissenschaft vorherrschenden neoklassischen Paradigma fundamental unterschätzt. Das hat auch mathematische Gründe, da dort Gleichgewichtsmodelle dominieren, die für die nichtlineare Struktur des Klimasystems ungeeignet sind. Wir schlagen daher eine "kritische mathematische Ökono-mie" vor, um einen solchen Missbrauch mathematischer Modelle zu kritisieren, bessere Modelle zu entwickeln, und auch über den Kapitalismus hinausweisende Wirtschaftsweisen mit Methoden aus der Mathematik und Informatik zu unterstützen. Es geht dabei insbesondere um die Möglichkeit und Not-wendigkeit einer ökologischen und demokratischen Wirtschaftsplanung, auch mit Blick auf aktuelle KI-Entwicklungen. Wir betrachten sowohl technische Möglichkeiten als auch die Ambivalenz von KI aus progressiver Sicht genauer (inkl. verschiedener grundlegender Definitionen, was "KI" genau bedeutet), mit einem Fokus auf Nachhaltigkeit, Kreislaufwirtschaft und Wirtschaftsdemokratie. |
| Abstract: | The dramatic economic consequences of climate change are fundamentally underestimated by the neoclassical paradigm that prevails in much of economic science. There are also mathematical reasons for this, as equilibrium models dominate in this field, and these models are unsuitable for the nonlinear structure of the climate system. We therefore propose a "critical mathematical economics" to critique such misuse of mathematical models, develop better models, and support economic systems that go beyond capitalism using methods from mathematics and computer science. In particular, this concerns the possibility and necessity of ecological and democratic economic planning, also in light of current AI developments. We take a closer look at both the technical possibilities and the ambivalence of AI from a progressive perspective (including various fundamental definitions of what "AI" actually means), with a focus on sustainability, the circular economy, and economic democracy. |
| Keywords: | democratic economic planning, , circular economy, mathematical economics, nonequilibrium climate modelling, AI |
| JEL: | A12 C02 Q54 Q57 P21 P41 |
| Date: | 2026 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:esprep:344040 |