Search

This dissertation charts the evolution of what I call American commercial maritime imperialism, a process pursued by American merchants and U.S. officials working to control sailor populations and American property overseas—far beyond the national borders of the United States. Between 1787 and 1848, the United States expanded its sovereignty from the east coast of North America westward to the ports and corridors of the Pacific Ocean. As American merchants and U.S. officials worked to create an infrastructure of authority and control over strategically important spaces in the Pacific, a maritime working population labored and resisted the terms of their service aboard vessels and ashore at ports of trade. By employing a multi-local approach to examine five commercial nodes of American imperialism in the Columbia River region, the Chile-Peru coast, the Hawaiian Islands, the Pearl River Delta, and the California waterfront, this dissertation demonstrates how obstructions to American global trade prompted the United States to establish and expand new and dynamic forms of sovereignty in the Pacific. It considers how the commercial activities of American merchants, their crews, and U.S. officials shaped the contours of early American state formation, economic growth, and foreign diplomacy. This approach to American imperial expansion represents a break from much of the scholarship on the subject. Studies of American Empire during the first half of the nineteenth century generally focus on westward migration, forced labor, and military conflict in northern Mexico and on what became the southwestern part of the United States. Histories of American foreign diplomacy overseas typically focus on the Spanish American War (1898) when the nation seized islands across the Pacific and in the Caribbean. By examining developments in the commercial maritime history of early America, this dissertation creates a global history of the United States. With its focus on maritime workers and merchant investors, this study contributes to new histories of U.S. political economy, global capitalism, and antebellum American foreign diplomacy.

The climate emergency, rising inequality, and pandemic diffusion have raised the question: for what purpose is capitalism fit? Implementing new policies and institutions to meet these challenges will require a realignment of political forces on a scale similar to that achieved by neoliberal policies and ideas over the past four decades. We suggest that a successful new paradigm must provide the basis of a dynamic and sustainable economy and be constituted by a synergistic set of ethical commitments, economic models, emblematic policies, and a new vernacular economics by which people understand and seek to improve their livelihoods and futures. We illustrate these four components by reference to the classical liberal, Keynesian-social democratic, and neoliberal paradigms. Using an expanded space for policies and institutions that integrates markets, states, and civil society, we propose elements of a new paradigm, including diminished space for capitalism and greater equality not only of economic endowments but also of dignity and voice.

I pose the problems of quality in higher education to be addressed through a bureaucratic, technology-centric and accountability-based framework. It relies heavily on quantitative, information-based and ideal institutional system of higher education. The new political economy of the twenty-first-century higher education creates the balance of power in favour of state and utilises the individual choice and market-based principle of governance. The article argues the alternative in terms of shifting the power in favour of academia. The power of academia shall be realised only if the attention is focussed both on creation as well as the purpose of knowledge in the twenty-first century. Universities need to be hermeneutic for allowing the scope of creative activity and accommodate the voices of marginalised sections. It means practical rationality should guide the academia and administrators of higher education. JEL Code: I2, I28

2020 was marked by major landmark events. First of all, there is the political crisis in the United States related to the presidential elections. Secondly, there is the UK’s secession from the EU. Finally, there is the unexpected return to power of left-wing forces in some Latin American countries. This forces us to return to the foundations and conclusions of the theory of public choice – a tool that allowed us to analyze and predict the political and economic behavior of modern electoral democracies.The paper states that the erosion of the middle class leads to the dominance of minorities and their priorities. The position of the median voter is losing its former significance. As a result, the political duopoly becomes unstable, in contrast to the model of political pluralism (oligopoly). The desire of middle-income countries with a high degree of social differentiation to adopt a bipartisan system in the hope that this will ensure political stability must be mistaken. In contrary to what was said, the construct of American federalism, which many scholars consider archaic, effectively defends horizontal democracy and discourages the imposition of values by aggressive minority coalitions. The use of one or another modification of the «electoral colleges» in the presidential and parliamentary elections would strengthen the federal principles of horizontal democracy in Russia. The article presents an analysis of two main approaches to the analysis of corruption – as «opportunistic behavior of an agent in the principal-agent model», and as «status rent». Criticism of the latter approach reveals the view of Russia as an «institutional mutant». Authors who interpret corruption as «status rent» tend to ignore the rent-seeking behavior of actors in rich countries. The article substantiates the idea of transferring to Russia the American legislation regulating the behavior of lobbyists, the contribution of funds to the electoral funds of parties and politicians. Such a transplant will dramatically reduce the volume of domestic corruption, while at the same time making the «electoral machines» much more transparent.

Contemporary political economy is predicated on widely shared ideas and assumptions, some explicit but many implicit, about the past. Our aim in this Special Issue is to draw attention to, and to assess critically, these historical assumptions. In doing so, we hope to contribute to a political economy that is more attentive to the analytic assumptions on which it is premised, more aware of the potential oversights, biases, and omissions they contain, and more reflexive about the potential costs of these blind spots. This is an Introduction to one of two Special Issues that are being published simultaneously by New Political Economy and Review of International Political Economy reflecting on blind spots in international political economy. Together, these Special Issues seek to identify the key blind spots in the field and to make sense of how many scholars missed or misconstrued important dynamics that define contemporary capitalism and the other systems and sources of social inequality that characterise our present. This particular Special Issue pursues this goal by looking backwards, to the history of political economy and at the ways in which we have come to tell that history, in order to understand how we got to the present moment.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented economic support measures from governments across Europe. With this, the crisis has provided an occasion for a significant demonstration of the ability of states to implement policies and deliver services. This could create expectations among electorates of permanent changes to the macroeconomic regime, towards one characterised by a more protective state and a rebalancing between the state and the market. Significant political barriers to such a shift remain. The article argues that, in contrast to the aftermath of the two previous economic crises in Europe, many new ideas are floating around and support for a more protective state is emerging across the political spectrum. The current crisis might thus represent a turning point.

This special section of New Political Economy demonstrates the value of critical environmental political economy for our understanding of energy, and possibilities for, just energy transformations....

In introducing this special section of New Political Economy, this paper explores the key themes that emerge from the three papers included in this special section presents a new generation of CC r...

Civilian and military uses of nuclear energy have produced a legacy of high-level radioactive wastes posing threats of millennial duration, and their production continues despite the absence of viable disposal solutions. These materials extend the impact of decisions made today into a far distant future, raising difficult questions regarding intergenerational and intragenerational social justice, ethical responsibility, and collective decision-making. This essay critically reviews those challenges using resources from the fields of communication and rhetoric, sociologies and philosophies of temporality and risk, and science and technology studies. The essay argues that modern notions of prediction, control, and decision-making are inadequate for addressing such highly complex phenomena and long temporal durations. Nuclear waste disposal is then examined as an activity that seeks not only to contain material hazards, but also to symbolically purify the system of nuclear production and consumption. The proposed U.S. nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain provides an example in which predictive models, which warrant both epistemic and political authority, are nevertheless insufficient bases for collective decision-making. The essay then considers the situation in the United States, where a new political economy of nuclear waste appears to be emerging, and offers summary conclusions regarding nuclear power and social justice.

This article theorizes the commodification of the recent resurgence of feminist activism through the concept of “feminist commodity activism.” The focus is on the mass popularization of feminist-themed commodities, with T-shirts as a particular focus. First, I discuss how the mass marketing of feminist goods ties in with: (a) commodity feminism, by refetishizing commodities and consumption as empowering for women; (b) neoliberal feminism, through the construction of the feminist as an economic and choice-making subject; and (c) commodity activism, by entangling feminism with the discourses and practices of ethical consumption. Building on these concepts, I propose “feminist commodity activism” as a way to capture and further analyze the current commodification of feminism activism occurring at their intersection. I argue that feminist commodity activism instigates three further shifts: the commodification of the aesthetic experience of feminist street protest; the transfer of feminist activist agency to companies, charities, and entrepreneurs; and the branding of the feminist as a subject of value. Finally, the article considers the challenges that these shifts pose for feminist critique and politics.

Revisión heterodoxa de Economía Política sobre el efecto reajuste en el sector turístico por impacto de la transición digital y su agravamiento con las crisis COVID-19 y guerra en Ucrania. Se plantea una síntesis del cambio paradigmático con la economía digital y cómo afecta a las relaciones laborales y profesionales, requiriéndose de una transformación del sistema económico y el proceso productivo. Se centra la atención en el sector turístico y su paradoja en la Unión Europea: pese a su creciente importancia, en cambio, su reconocimiento y transformación resulta insuficiente. Dicha paradoja se intensifica en el caso español, donde más fondos europeos de recuperación se están destinando y sin embargo está creciendo la vulnerabilidad de sus PYMES y emprendedores turísticos. Heterodox review of Political Economy on the readjustment effect in the tourism sector due to the impact of the digital transition and its aggravation with the COVID-19 crisis and the war in Ukraine. A synthesis of the paradigmatic change with the digital economy and how it affects labor and professional relations is proposed, requiring a transformation of the economic system and the production process. Attention is focused on the tourism sector and its paradox in the European Union: despite its growing importance, however, its recognition and transformation is insufficient. This paradox is intensified in the Spanish case, where more European recovery funds are being allocated and yet the vulnerability of its SMEs and tourism entrepreneurs is growing.

The Covid-19 pandemic is disrupting the international political economy unlike any event since WWII. Consequently, France reversed years of fiscal consolidation by instating, at least temporarily, a costly emergency furlough scheme reaching a third of the workforce. This provides a natural setting to investigate a potential ‘critical juncture’, and whether the French public still accepts austerity politics today, as it seems to have after the Global Financial Crisis. We observe crisis narratives’ salience across social classes, employing an original quantitative approach for Critical Political Economy, which uses panel data and two experiments. We test if citizens’ viewpoints are sensitive to the trade-off between health and economics, receptive to austerity and conditioned by their socioeconomic status. We find that public opinion shifted after an authoritative and dire economic forecast at the pandemic’s first peak in April 2020, but that acquiescence to austerity did not occur during the phase-out of the first lockdown in June, with the exception of the upper class. Overall, public support favours increased social spending, and pro-austerity crisis narratives might not shape the majority’s ‘common sense’, as they had after the GFC. We conclude with implications for the study of class and public policy in a post-pandemic world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of New Political Economy is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Public choice theory is listed under microeconomics in the JEL code. It is considered largely an issue of microeconomics, as well as the microeconomists who straddle the boundary between economics and political science. Starting from the 1970s, however, there has been an increasing number of macroeconomists researching on topics related to public choice-inspired macroeconomic models, and a few public choice scholars have discussed macroeconomic issues under the public choice framework. The difference is that the first group has attempted to separate themselves from the very label of “public choice” itself, adopting all manners of alternative labels (such as political macroeconomics, political economics, new political economy, among others). To these I use the term “New Political Macroeconomics” as an umbrella label for this tradition. This has created conflicts with other public choice traditions, especially the Virginia tradition. They claim that this attempt to “separate” from public choice is harmful to the entire field of economic analysis of politics. This article is an attempt to understand the formation of new political macroeconomics, how it became its own tradition of public choice and why it would want to separate from the label of “public choice theory.” The reasons, as this article shall detail, are primarily the political macroeconomists’ adoption of the macroeconomics paradigm, and the attempt to distance themselves from the ideological association with libertarianism present in some public choice traditions. This discussion indicates how differences in language and values might impact how economists see their subject of study: even if public choice theorists and political macroeconomists study similar topics, they have different understandings of them. La théorie du choix public est répertoriée sous microéconomie dans le code JEL. Elle est largement considérée comme une question de microéconomie, au même titre que les micro-économistes qui chevauchent la frontière entre économie et science politique. Cependant, à partir des années 1970, un nombre croissant de macroéconomistes effectue des recherches sur des sujets liés aux modèles macroéconomiques inspirés des choix publics, et quelques spécialistes des choix publics ont discuté des questions macroéconomiques dans le cadre des choix publics. La différence est que le premier groupe a tenté de se séparer de l'étiquette de « choix public », en adoptant toutes d’autres étiquettes alternatives (telles que macroéconomie politique, économie politique, nouvelle économie politique, entre autres). Pour qualifier ces derniers, j’utilise le terme « nouvelle macroéconomie politique » comme étiquette générale de cette tradition. Cette pluralité de termes a créé des conflits avec d’autres traditions du choix public, en particulier celle de Virginie. Ceux-ci affirment que cette tentative de « séparation » du choix public est préjudiciable à tout le champ de l'analyse économique de la politique. Cet article cherche à comprendre la formation de la nouvelle macroéconomie politique, comment elle est devenue sa propre tradition de choix public et pourquoi elle voudrait se séparer de l'étiquette de « théorie du choix public ». Les raisons, comme cet article le détaillera, sont principalement liées à l’adoption par les macroéconomistes politiques du paradigme de la macroéconomie, et leur tentative de se distancier de l’association idéologique avec le libertarisme présent dans certaines traditions de choix public. Cette discussion indique comment les différences de langage et de valeurs peuvent avoir un impact sur la façon dont les économistes voient leur sujet d’étude : même si les théoriciens des choix publics et les macroéconomistes politiques étudient des sujets similaires, ils en ont une compréhension différente.

The thesis first combs the mechanism of regional industrial homogeneity influencing economic fluctuations from a new political economy from both the micro and macro perspectives. Once again, the paper uses data from the three industries, sub-industries, and national and regional economic fluctuations in 30 provinces and cities in Mainland China from 1952 to 2020 to describe Chinese macroeconomic fluctuations industrial homogeneity characteristics. Finally, the paper uses panel data and an error correction model to empirically study the impact of regional industrial homogeneity on economic fluctuations from the new political economy's perspective. The research shows that from the perspective of the same structure of the three industries, the more the industrial structure in the first region converges, the more severe the economic fluctuations. The impact of the same structure of regional industries on economic fluctuations is long-term. Secondly, according to the phased estimation results of the three industries' basic model, the influence of the same structure of the tertiary industries in the region on economic fluctuations has always existed. Still, the effects of different periods show differences. Thirdly, no matter what method is used to measure economic fluctuations or industrial homogeneity, regional industrial homogeneity will aggravate regional economic fluctuations. The thesis compares the impact of the same structure of the industrial industry and the same structure of three industries on economic fluctuations. This paper verifies the impact of the same structure of regional industries on economic fluctuations from the perspective of a new political economy, the impact of the same structure of institutional industries on economic fluctuations. The exact structure of non-institutional industries has a more significant impact on economic fluctuations.

The paper deals with the issue of lobbying, defined as a democratic means of promoting interests. The text tries to find answers to the problems in the current economic theory. The basic links are defined by using a simple graphic model, which are further examined by the SWOT analysis. The result is the knowledge that the basic coordination mechanism is the market – the information market. The role of government lies above all in creating a favourable institutional environment that does not interfere with spontaneous market relations. However, there are certain situations that the government could or should regulate. These situations are described by three hypothetical scenarios – a society without lobbying, a society where lobbing exists, but it is not transparent, and a society where lobbing is transparent, leading to a final discussion of possible directions and ways of its regulation.

It is perhaps difficult to believe it now, but around the time that New Political Economy came into being in the early 1990s, Christopher Layne (1993) wrote a paper for International Security entit...

Earlier the idea that we might be looking at techno feudalism was advanced and Bleuca makes a comparable point above. Are the spaces outlined here the bondage context for the new feudalism, the new political economy which is a version of the political economy found in feudalism? Or are we looking at a new animal, something we are not sure how to describe?

Background: For decades, the food industry has sought to deflect criticisms of its products and block public health legislation through a range of offensive and defensive strategies. More recently, food corporations have moved on to present themselves as "part of the solution" to the health problems their products cause. This strategic approach is characterised by appeasement, co-option and partnership, and involves incremental concessions and attempts to partner with health actors. This paper details how corporate practices have evolved and changed over the past two decades and gives some definition to what this new political economy signifies for the wider behaviours of corporations producing and selling harmful commodities. Methods: This paper draws on public health and political science literature to classify the food industry’s "part of the solution" strategy into three broad components: regulatory responses and capture; relationship building; and market strategies. We detail the key characteristics and consequences of each component. Results: The three components of the food industry’s "part of the solution" strategy all involve elements of appeasement and co-option. They also improve the political environment and resources of the food industry. Regulatory responses offer incremental concessions that seek to maintain corporate influence over governance processes and minimise the threat of regulations; relationship building fosters access to health and government stakeholders, and opportunities to acquire and maintain channels of direct influence; and market strategies to make products and portfolios healthier bolster the market share and revenue of food corporations while improving their public image. Conclusion: Rather being a signal of lost position and power, the food industry’s repositioning as "part of the solution" has created a highly profitable political economy of ‘healthy’ food production, alongside continued production of unhealthy commodities, a strategy in which it is also less burdensome and conflictual for corporations to exercise political power and influence.

The emergence of platforms as key architectures of the new economy has not only shifted the space of technical innovation and economic activity; it is also giving rise to a new political economy. This chapter is an attempt to outline the contours of this political economy. With a focus on heteromation as the division of labor between humans and machines, we introduce “decomposition” of tasks as a key mechanism that allows platforms to extract value from users and gig workers in expansive and often invisible ways. The continuities as well as novelties of the decompositional approach compared to earlier organizations of work (the workshop and the factory) are explored, and the implications for the future of work are examined, allowing us to steer away from the dominant substitution-complementation debate.

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) was officially inaugurated in Rome on February 27, 1930 (Toniolo, Central bank cooperation at the bank for international settlements, 1930–1973, Cambridge University Press, 2005), with signing the agreements by seven nations (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and Switzerland) and now sixty-two central banks are members of the BIS (BIS, 2019a). The core objectives of the establishment of the BIS were to manage reparation payments required to be made by Germany under the Treaty of Versailles following World War I (BIS, 2019b; Seabrooke, New Political Economy 11:141–149, 2006). Other reasons for the establishment of this institution include the dominance of the dollar that surpassed sterling as a source of trade credit during and after World War I (WW I), which created the necessity for acceptance of bills in dollars for European countries (Eichengreen and Flandreau, Open Economic Review 23:57–87, 2011). On the other hand, Basel Accord first initiated by the BIS in response to the several chaos observed in the international banking arena in 1980s. The chapter comprehensively discusses those issues of BIS and Basel Accords from historical grounds. The structure of the chapter is as follows. Section 2.2 provides a summary of the historical background of the establishment of the BIS and its role on bringing financial stability in the Western European market. Section 2.3 discusses the establishment of BCBS by BIS, turmoil of global financial industry in the 1980s and initiation of the Basel Accord by the BIS. Section 2.4 highlights the role of capital in Basel Accord and key reasons for reforms in the Basel Accords. Section 2.5 presents concluding remarks.

This research aims to demonstrate Caesar's law to protect civilians in Syria and its effect on the social and economic circumstances of millions of Syrians stuck in their country because of the state of the siege imposed by the law's sanctions. The question tries to focus on how the law can achieve its human aims under the negative economic consequences it has on civilians, relying on the new political economy approach. It tried to interpret the non-economic activity of politicians under the Economy cover. Accordingly, The United States continues to tighten its hold on the Syrian system to exercise pressure on Syria, and to make political compromises and start significant political reforms immediately. Still, the direct targeting of Syrian economic structures through the law-imposed blockade has isolated the Syrian regime and cut off all official economic ties externally. It is encouraging the escalation of dealings with informal mediators, which has led to a sharp collapse in the Syrian Lira and a significant increase in consumer prices, which has been reflected negatively on the social reality in the light of the marked increase in poverty rates.

This paper explores the Chinese agricultural technology demonstration centers (ATDCs) in Africa, a recent evolution of Chinese-African agricultural cooperation often recognized as a representative example of South-South cooperation. More specifically, the study observes the development of the ATDCs in Africa, through a literature review, and indicates major limitations in ATDCs research. This paper proposes a new political economy approach that accounts for place and space, which are crucial lenses for the analysis of ATDCs in Africa. The reconsideration of spatial relations takes into account the importance of the local territory, where operations are based, as an active constituent in China-Africa agricultural cooperation. KEY WORDS: SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION, AGRICULTURE, DEVELOPMENT, CHINA, AFRICA

Resumo O artigo analisa os legados da Revolução de 1930 por um novo ângulo: o das políticas públicas. Para tanto, estabelece um recorte sobre as políticas econômicas lançadas desde 1930, evidenciando o fio de Ariadne dessas transformações. A metodologia combina, de forma inédita, história serial e análise com foco em políticas públicas, tendo como fonte básica os decretos presidenciais, buscando impressões digitais do presidente nessas mudanças. Conclui-se que mudanças mais significativas só ganharam impulso na virada para os anos 1940, a ponto não só de reorientar a política econômica, mas de se criar uma nova economia política.

A political economy perspective on aging and old age emphasizes the broad implications of economic life for the aged and for society’s treatment of the elderly. The central challenge of the political economy of aging is to understand the character and significance of variations in the treatment of the aged and to relate them to broader societal trends. A major task is to understand how the aging process itself is influenced by the treatment and location of elders in society. The sociohistorical, political, and economic context in which persons age and become a “problem group” is relevant to understanding the relative influence of the state and class relations as they impinge upon the resources allocated to different subgroups of elders. The political economy perspective proposed here necessarily draws heavily on state theory and all varieties of neo-Weberian and neo-Marxist theoretical developments therein.

Public choice theory is an established part of general economic theory. It emerged as an offshoot of the mainstream in the 1940s and deals with applying economic methods to political analysis and decision making within political institutions. Today, the public choice approach is being used successfully in a wide spectrum of social sciences, as well as in politics at the macro- and international levels. At the theoretical level, we feel that public choice theory is of wide importance relating to the change in definition of its traditional place in economic theory. Approximately, this change began to occur during the 1980s, and it documents an interpretative shift from public choice theory being a relatively independent economic discipline to a discipline that is presented as an immanent part of the new political economy, a newly created school of opinion. This paper’s goal is to analyze and discuss the paradigmatic, historically conditioned theoretical-methodological concept of public choice by using research into the literature. Concurrently, our ambition is also to define key points of overlap that link public choice theory to the economic mainstream (neoclassical economics) on one hand and the new political economy on the other. We have developed the conclusions of this analysis and intellectual comparison into a wider discussion of public choice theory’s significance and its role in the formative process of economic theory’s development and future trajectory. Teorie veřejné volby je etablovanou součástí obecné ekonomické teorie. Ve 40. letech minulého století vznikla jako odnož tehdejšího mainstreamu, zabývající se aplikací ekonomických metod k analýze politiky a rozhodování v politických institucích. Dnes se přístup veřejné volby úspěšně uplatňuje v širokém spektru společenských věd, na makroúrovni i v mezinárodní politice. V teoretické rovině vnímáme široký význam teorie veřejné volby v souvislosti se změnou vymezení jejího tradičního místa uvnitř ekonomických teorií. Tato změna se prosazuje zhruba od 80. let minulého století a dokumentuje interpretační posun teorie veřejné volby od relativně samostatně stojící ekonomické disciplíny k disciplíně, která je prezentována jako imanentní součást nově vzniklého názorového uskupení, tzv. New Political Economy. Cílem tohoto textu je, na základě literární rešerše, analyzovat a diskutovat paradigmatický, historicky podmíněný teoreticko-metodologický koncept teorie veřejné volby. Naši ambicí je přitom vymezení klíčových styčných bodů, které propojují teorii veřejné volby s ekonomickým mainstreamem (neoklasickou ekonomií) na straně jedné a New Political Economy. na straně druhé. Závěry provedené analýzy a myšlenkové komparace rozvíjíme v širší diskuzi nad významem a rolí teorie veřejné volby ve formativním procesu vývoje ekonomické teorie a jejího budoucího směřování.