Search results

This chapter is a radical critique of the neoclassical growth theory, justifying ways out of mainstream economics. It has three parts. The first one analyzes growth theories from the Classical representation to the endogenous growth models. The second part demonstrates that the “new growth theory” is not a break with Solow's formalization. To prove it, we build an original Solowian endogenous growth model. Then, this neoclassical macrodynamic framework is technically, deeply critized in a third part. We show that both exogenous and endogenous neoclassical models prove to be incapable to explain growth in the long period. We concentrate on the ambiguities surrounding the hypothesis of single agent, as well as on the role of the state, in particular when it is considered as a “planner” by the neoclassicals. Endogenous growth models do not correspond to macrodynamization of the Walrasian general equilibrium, nor have solid microeconomic bases. We advocate in favor of rehabilitating state's intervention in social areas and of reactivating Marxist theoretical reflections regarding social planning and class analysis in the current time of structural crisis of the capitalist world system.

This paper reviews one of the crucial issues in the recent growth literature concerning the hypothesis of cross country convergence of levels and growth rates of income per capita implied by the neo‐classical growth model, both in the Solow‐Swan and Rampsey‐Cass‐Koopmans versions. The alternative endogenous growth models, consistent with permanent income inequality, are considered. Convergence to a common income level versus divergence is discussed from a theoretical point of view. Then, empirical tests of the convergence property are presented. What emerges is that Barro type regressions and their findings about “conditional” convergence are questionable and cannot be used to give a definitive response on this issue.

To overcome the errors of the exogenous growth theories of the past, the new growth theories, currently in vogue, attempt to incorporate technological change as endogenous to the growth process. While making a commendable effort to see into that black box of technological change, these so‐called new growth theories are also subject to question and critique on a variety of grounds. One of these is that the new growth theories are not really that new. Another area of concern relates to their empirical relevancy. This is especially evident in assessing the practical use of the new growth theories in terms of problem identification and policy resolution. Other problem areas relate to issues of conceptual clarity and underlying assumptions. By assuming the process of economic growth to be synonymous with that of economic development the result is to avoid the prerequisite structural transformation inherent in the dynamics of culture evolution. Culture evolution in turn is predicated upon technological advance conceptualized as both material and social technology. It is argued in this paper that an explanation as to why technology is endogenous to the processes of growth and economic development is best served vis‐à‐vis an analysis of the dynamics of culture evolution.

This paper aims to investigate empirically whether Islamic securities enhance economic growth in the Southeast Asian region based on the endogenous growth theory using the non-parametric analysis.

This paper applies panel quantile regression with Markov chain Monte Carlo optimization as an optimal non-parametric approach to investigate the effect of Islamic securities on economic growth starting from 2013Q4 to 2019Q4 in Southeast Asia. Total issued Islamic securities holdings are employed as a measure for Islamic securities, while the gross domestic product is employed as a proxy for economic growth. The sample includes all working Islamic financial foundations in the top progressive Islamic securities markets' countries of Southeast Asia (Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei Darussalam).

The findings confirm that the increase of issuing Islamic securities in Islamic capital markets of Southeast Asia is increasing the levels of economic growth, reflecting the weighty role of the Islamic capital market development as an active contributor to economic growth.

This research would fill the literature gap by exploring Islamic securities–economic growth nexus in Southeast Asia using a robust non-parametric approach based on the endogenous growth theory for better estimation results. The findings of this review serve as a roadmap for financial analysts, policymakers and decision makers to stimulate the Islamic securities markets as another source of finance which can promote the economic growth.

This research is the first that investigates empirically the Islamic securities–economic growth nexus in Southeast Asia using a new empirical investigation built on the non-parametric analysis and outlined within the theoretical context of the endogenous growth model to gain robust evidence about this nexus.

The current chapter proposes a theoretical framework to assess the sustainability of economic growth in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) States. The authors integrate insights from endogenous growth models and consider the unique socioeconomic characteristics of the GCC region to provide a comprehensive and tailored approach to understanding the determinants of economic growth and formulating effective policy measures to foster sustainable development and growth. This chapter highlights the environmental challenges faced by GCC; based on this, the authors suggested indicators to construct a theoretical framework (Economic Growth, Climatic Indicators, Energy Indicators, Social Indicators, and Economic Resources Indicators). The authors propose that policymakers and researchers in GCC States should take these factors into account when devising policies or conducting research aimed at fostering sustainable economic growth. Overall, this chapter presents significant insights for policymakers, researchers, and stakeholders involved in promoting the sustainable economic advancement of the GCC States.

The existing theoretical and empirical research on cultural impact is rather inconsistent. The purpose of this paper is to deal with the reasons for this inconsistency by debating the adequate inclusion of the cultural factor in the growth model and the way to properly measure cultural capital (CC) for this purpose.

The paper starts with analyzing the limitations of growth theory (in particular Paul Romer ' s endogenous growth model) when CC is not taken into consideration. The amelioration is suggested through involvement of the Weberian mechanism of cultural impact. The difference between Weber ' s mechanism and using religion as a measurement proxy for cultural attitudes is enlightened. The improvement of Weber ' s measurement of CC by elevating Pierre Bourdieu ' s approach to CC from individual to aggregate regional level is suggested. Real data from five EU countries on NUTS II level is addressed for illustrating the above reasoning.

The evidence shows that the suggested by the paper measurement strategy for CC allows for treating culture indeed as a single factor both in theoretical and econometrical sense of the term factor, but without loss of information, which is otherwise inevitable if the author try to approximate culture with a single mono-dimensional variable such as religion.

Through discussion on Rome ' s endogenous growth model and Weber ' s cultural mechanisms of impact, the amelioration of growth theory by inclusion of CC is explained, operationalized and applied on a real data example.

The prevailing theories of entrepreneurship have typically revolved around the ability of individuals to recognize opportunities and act on them by starting new ventures. This has generated a literature asking why entrepreneurial behavior varies across individuals with different characteristics, while implicitly holding the external context in which the individual finds oneself to be constant. Thus, where the opportunities come from, or the source of entrepreneurial opportunities, are also implicitly taken as given. By contrast, we provide a theory identifying at least one source of entrepreneurial opportunity – new knowledge and ideas that are not fully commercialized by the organization actually investing in the creation of that knowledge. The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship holds individual characteristics as given, but lets the context vary. In particular, high knowledge contexts are found to generate more entrepreneurial opportunities, where the entrepreneur serves as a conduit for knowledge spillovers. By contrast, impoverished knowledge contexts are found to generate fewer entrepreneurial opportunities. By serving as a conduit for knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship is the missing link between investments in new knowledge and economic growth. Thus, the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship provides not just an explanation of why entrepreneurship has become more prevalent as the factor of knowledge has emerged as a crucial source for comparative advantage, but also why entrepreneurship plays a vital role in generating economic growth. Entrepreneurship is an important mechanism permeating the knowledge filter to facilitate the spillover of knowledge, and ultimately generating economic growth.