Search

This paper examines the complex nexus between regulation and inequality in Zimbabwe's microfinance and tourism sectors. Rural Small to Medium Enterprises in Tourism (SMETs) is typical in the informal sector. However, SMETs in rural areas face financial, regulatory, and exclusionary constraints. This paper follows a qualitative literature review methodology guided by an exploratory design. In addition, one secondary case study was included to highlight the lived realities of SMETs. Findings indicate a complex connection between regulation and inequality in the economy. Overregulation leads to corruption, marginalization, and exclusion of small business activities. SMETs are constrained because they need access to finance for business growth. Thus, the nexus between the two variables profoundly impacts policy. The government must entangle the relationship for policy directions in the microfinance and tourism sectors. The paper concludes that the nexus between regulation and inequality needs urgent attention. The paper's originality is based on using a systematic literature review to assess how regulations affect microfinance's ability to fund rural SMETs so that these areas could have economic opportunities that would improve the livelihoods of people residing in these areas, thereby addressing inequalities. Furthermore, it contributes to the debates on the complex relationship between regulation and inequality of two sectors (microfinance and tourism) in Zimbabwe. It also informs future lines of research on the subject. Due to noted limitations on the research design used, more comprehensive empirical studies are required to understand the complexity of the nexus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The basic facts of China's economic development have called into question Western transition economic theory, most famously presented in the works of János Kornai. On the other hand, the three most representative approaches to explaining China's development experience have variously emphasized the resource endowment structure, or the property rights system, or the incentive mechanism behind the behavior of local governments, as the key to China's economic development. Although they focus on different dimensions of China's economic practices, they ultimately converge on the logic of marketism as the explanation. The "social science of practice" approach proposed by Philip Huang is distinguished from these orthodox theories in that, first, it attends to the rise of the huge informal economy in China and reveals the historical roots of contemporary social inequality. This approach has three closely related characteristics: theoretical formulations based on analyses of paradoxical phenomena, a broad historical perspective on current problems, and the idea of substantive justice. The main significance of this approach lies not only in its insightful and practice-focused understanding of the key realities that have been ignored by mainstream theories, but, more importantly, in its multiple inspirations for constructing a social science theory that incorporates Chinese subjectivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We identify a basic dualism between capitalist and noncapitalist spaces within the vast informal sector in India, and show that this dualism has been reproduced and reinforced during the past decade of high economic growth. This calls into question the idea of capitalist transition that informs much of the discourse on economic development. We provide some preliminary arguments about the nature of this dualism and the process of reproduction of the noncapitalist economic space.JEL Classifications: O14, O17, J46 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers an approach that helps geographers and others to carefully and critically reexamine prospects for diverse economies. We propose an interpretative institutionalist perspective is useful for elucidating overlooked opportunities for creating alternative economic visions and practices by revealing the process of ‘meaning making’ undertaken by actors in the process of developing policy responses to various dilemmas. We explore this notion in the context of de-growth or post-growth. De-growth is a way of thinking about the economy in ways that are not growth oriented, or fixated on GDP, but on the redistribution of wealth and living within the Earth’s ecosystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]