Search results

This chapter offers the first full translation from Russian to English of the Balance of the National Economy of the USSR, 1924–26’s first chapter. Involving 12 authors and composed of 21 chapters, the Balance is a collective work published in June 1926 in Moscow by the Soviet Central Statistical Administration under the scientific supervision of its former director, Pavel Illich Popov (1872–1950). In this first chapter, titled ‘Studying the Balance of the National Economy: An Introduction’, Popov set the theoretical foundations of what might be considered as the first modern national accounting system and paved the way to multisector macroeconometric modelling.

The purpose of this article, which is based in the tradition of critical theory, is to present a number of reasons for preserving a strong production economy given that the aim of the nation state is to work for improved competitive advantage.

The critical theory approach is used in this paper.

The paper is also an attempt to show why a majority of Western countries have defended the transformation from a predominant production economy to a service economy by explaining the shift as a result of class interests, using new class theory. It argues for why a materialist perspective in economic theory is relevant today.

The Western world should focus more on the production economy and less on the service economy.

To the author's knowledge, no other paper has gathered as many arguments on the issue before.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

Due to the emergence of global production networks, trade statistics have became less accurate in describing the dependence of emerging Asia on external demand. This chapter analyses, using an update of the Asian International Input–Output (AIO) table, the interdependence of emerging Asian economies, the United States, the EU15, and Japan via trade and production linkages. According to the results, we do not find evidence of the decoupling of emerging Asia from the rest of the world. On the contrary, we find evidence on increasing trade integration, both globally and regionally. Nonetheless, our analysis indicates that emerging Asia's dependence on exports is only about one-third of its GDP, that is, well below the 50% exposure suggested by trade data. This finding can be explained by the high import content of exports in these economies, which is a result of the increasing segmentation of production across the region.

This study aims to examine the effects of energy consumption on economic growth by means of a panel data analysis of 75 net energy-importing countries for the period 1990 to 2012.

For the purpose of the analysis, the countries are classified into two groups, and each group is then classified into subgroups. The first group is formed based on the energy import dependence of the countries and is classified into two subgroups according to whether their dependence is greater than or less than 50 per cent. The second group is formed based on the income level of the countries and is classified into four subgroups, specifically, low-income economies, lower-middle-income economies, upper-middle-income economies and high-income economies.

The findings obtained for both panel data and for each country indicate that there is a positive and statistically significant relationship between energy consumption and economic growth over the long term such that energy consumption contributes more to economic growth as the import dependence of the country decreases. Moreover, the effect of energy consumption on economic growth decreases as the income level of the country increases. This indicates that the efficient use of energy is as important as energy consumption, which is regarded as an important indicator of economic development.

The authors expect that these findings will make a valuable contribution to the results of future studies, as they analyze the relationships among the variables by including the energy intensities of the countries.

Este estudio examina los efectos del consumo de energía en el crecimiento económico, mediante un análisis de datos de panel de 75 países importadores netos de energía para el período 1990-2012.

A los efectos del análisis, los países se clasifican en dos grupos y cada grupo luego se clasifica en subgrupos. El primer grupo se forma en base a la dependencia de los países en materia de importación de energía y se clasifica en dos subgrupos según su dependencia sea superior o inferior al 50%. El segundo grupo se forma sobre la base del nivel de ingresos de los países y se clasifica en cuatro subgrupos: economías de ingresos bajos, economías de ingresos medios-bajos, economías de ingresos medios-altos y economías de ingresos altos.

Los hallazgos obtenidos, tanto para los datos de panel como para cada país, indican que existe una relación positiva y estadísticamente significativa entre el consumo de energía y el crecimiento económico a largo plazo, de modo que el consumo de energía contribuye más al crecimiento económico a medida que disminuye la dependencia de las importaciones del país. Además, el efecto del consumo de energía en el crecimiento económico disminuye a medida que aumenta el nivel de ingresos del país. Esto indica que el uso eficiente de la energía es tan importante como el consumo de la misma, que se considera un indicador importante del desarrollo económico.

Los autores esperan que estos hallazgos aporten una valiosa contribución para estudios futuros, ya que analizan las relaciones entre las variables mediante la inclusión de las intensidades de los países.

Consumo de energía, Crecimiento económico, Importadores netos de energía, Panel de datos

Artículo de investigación

This paper traces the path of Marxism in the 20th century with special focus upon its place within political economy. It argues that the emphasis upon Marxism as a political economy has been directly connected to movement away from Marxism as a theory of class struggle. It begins by establishing how and why, in Marx’s view, all history is a history of class struggles and integrates this perspective with his work in Capital. It is argued that political economy was one of the things Marx was critiquing and that he was attempting to show political economy to be a product of capitalism rather than seeking to establish a Marxist political economy.

Despite profound differences, both the German Historical School and the critical theory of the Frankfurt School have in common a theoretical and cultural heritage in Central European traditions of social thought and philosophy. Although both schools often are perceived as quintessentially German traditions of economic and social research, their methodological presuppositions and critical intent diverge strongly. Since the objective of the Frankfurt School was to carry the theoretical critique initiated by Marx into the twentieth century, and since its members did so on a highly abstract level of theoretical criticism, the suggestion may be surprising that in terms of their respective research agendas, there was a common denominator between the German Historical School and the Frankfurt School critical theory. To be sure, as will become apparent, the common ground was rather tenuous and indirect. We must ask, then: in what respects did their theoretical and analytical foundations and orientations overlap? How did the German Historical School, as a nineteenth-century tradition of economic thinking, influence the development of the Frankfurt School?

The purpose of this paper is to consider inter-organisational issues in supply chain relationships (SCRs) with a view to advancing research on co-creation of value in the service dominant logic (SDL) field.

The study presents a conceptual analysis of current ideas on purchasing and SCRs with special emphasis on inter-organisational collaboration as viewed from exchange- and production economy perspectives. Important types of service buyers and sellers provide in order to co-create value in SCRs are explored.

Both exchange- and production economy perspectives offer useful insights for the study of co-creation of value in SCRs. The exchange economy perspective recognises service provision in terms of information sharing, adaptation and commitment, while the production economy perspective recognises service provision in terms of production proficiency, craftsmanship and entrepreneurship.

SDL researchers should recognise the relevance of both exchange- and production economy perspectives in further study of co-creation of value in SCRs. Future research should consider how specific types of service provision are affected by operant resources as well as other important SDL concepts, such as trust, buyer involvement and relational orientation.

This paper considers specific types of service provision in SCRs for the purpose of co-creation of value.

Currently, China’s economy is in the critical phase of transforming economic development patterns and replacing old growth drivers with new ones. Whether it can successfully overcome the “middle-income trap” has become a significant issue attracting wide attention.

Driven by underlying digital technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, cloud computing and big data, the fourth industrial revolution featuring the booming digital economy has provided significant opportunities for China’s economy to “overtake” and overcome the “middle-income trap”. The transformation of economic development pattern, the optimization of industrial structure, and the change of growth drivers, brought by the deep integration of digital and real economies are the keys to leaping over the “middle-income trap”.

From the supply side, the digital economy can improve the quality and efficiency of the supply side and promote the supply-side structural reform and economic growth from the following three aspects: First, promote the quality, efficiency and diversification of the supply system; second, promote networking, opening-up and synergy in the innovation system and third, promote the socialization, modularization and flexibility of production pattern. From the demand side, the digital economy can boost the new drivers of the “troika” of economic growth consisting of consumption, exports and investment by changing the market investment direction, promoting consumption upgrade and fostering export strengths. However, once these two attributes interact with each other, especially when data is combined with capital, the most adhesive factor in the market economy, a series of new social relations will then be produced based on the technical attribute, resulting in significant adjustments in social relations, involving both positive and negative externalities.

To overcome the “middle-income trap”, it is necessary to adapt to the laws of economic evolution and promote a fundamental change in economic growth drivers; boost the high-quality development of the digital economy by strengthening the support role of data in the digital economy; and accelerate digital industrialization and industrial digitalization to realize the integration of digital and real economies.