Search

Using the frequency-domain spillover index method, we investigate time-frequency spillovers and their underlying drivers among fossil energy, clean energy and metal markets. We find that short-term spillovers are stronger than long-term spillovers. Global clean energy markets are powerful spillover transmitters that can have strong impacts on fossil energy and metal markets. Rare earth metals are most vulnerable to spillover effects from clean energy and base metal markets, particularly in the long term. Different clean energy sources and metal markets have heterogeneous connectedness, e.g., the impact of wind energy on rare earth market is greater than that of solar energy. The short-term spillovers are mainly driven by policy changes, while the long-term spillovers are mainly affected by stock market uncertainty and economic fundamentals. Our findings have important implications for the construction of optimal diversification strategies and the design of policy incentives to promote clean energy investments across different time horizons. Keywords: Clean energy, Metals, Spillovers, Time-frequency, Spillover drivers, 1. INTRODUCTION Metals are an energy-consuming resource that require fossil energy for their extraction, production, smelting and recycling processes; therefore, fossil energy is an important input for the operation of [...]

One hundred years ago, Justice Holmes embraced the marketplace of ideas in his dissenting opinion in Abrams v. United States. (1) The same year as this centennial anniversary, Justice Kennedy, [...]

Increasing reliance on market mechanisms in higher education is analysed both as one of the approaches to steering as well as in relation to the consequences of markets for quality and accessibility of higher education. This article goes beyond the normative considerations of market elements as inherently good or bad and the economic theory-guided focus on freedoms of users and providers, by presenting an alternative conceptualization. The conceptualization adapted from studies of markets in other parts of the welfare state to the context of higher education is based on two dimensions: (1) who effectively controls production of certain goods and services and (2) how access to and funding of these goods and services are regulated. It focuses on interests of three main actors-the state, the users (students) and the providers (higher education institutions). This leads to six conceptually distinct markets, whose key characteristics are illustrated by examples from Denmark, England, India, Norway, Portugal and Serbia. The key message is that this alternative conceptualization allows identifying variance in marketization of higher education with regards to (1) which actors are empowered, (2) who are the likely winners and losers and (3) what might be the risks of introducing specific market elements in a higher education system. More generally, a more nuanced analysis relying on this conceptualization can potentially contribute to a deeper understanding of political and policy dynamics in higher education., Author(s): Jens Jungblut [sup.1] , Martina Vukasovic [sup.2] Author Affiliations: (Aff1) 0000 0001 1089 1036, grid.5155.4, International Centre for Higher Education Research (INCHER), University of Kassel, , Moenchebergstr. 17, 34109, [...]

Almost 100 years ago, Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek argued that a socialist state could not determine marginal cost prices and therefore could not allocate resources rationally. Oskar Lange and Abba Lerner responded with the market socialist model. Subsequent scholars have refined the model (Leeman, Roemer). Views on market socialism for an entire economy are mixed (Phelps, S h lei fer and Vishny, Roemer). We briefly review the debate. We argue that a form of market socialism exists and is especially important in education, health care, and health insurance. In these sectors, prices are often set or restricted centrally, while many providers are state-owned, nonprofit, or mutual firms. We argue in favor of applying market socialist principles to health care and to health insurance policy. In particular, we show that these principles imply that community rating of health insurance is a source of major inefficiencies and harmful regulatory pressure. We suggest moving in the market socialist direction --toward marginal cost pricing and therefore away from community rating. The desire for universal or expanded coverage can be fulfilled by explicit, politically transparent subsidies paid to consumers who are both poor and high risk. Comparative Economic Studies (2017) 59, 405-427. doi: 10.1057/s41294-0170027-3; published online 9 June 2017 Keywords: health insurance, market socialism, quasi-markets, pricing, community rating, new public management, corporatization JEL Classification: 113, P51, P27, 118, D47, B24, D02, L31, INTRODUCTION The socialist calculation debate began almost 100 years ago when Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek argued that a socialist state could not determine marginal cost prices and therefore [...]

Author(s): Mark G. Brennan[sup.1] Author Affiliations: Mark G. Brennan is adjunct associate professor of business ethics in the Business & Society Program at the New York University Stern School of [...]

The U.S. recovery from the Great Recession has proceeded at a slow pace. Brady Lavender and Nicolas Parent (2012-13) show that the economy has been rebounding more slowly than from [...]