Search results

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

Recent research supports the role of productive government spending as an important determinant of economic growth. Previous analyses have focused on the separate effects of public investment in infrastructure and on investment in education. This paper aims to introduce both types of public investment simultaneously, enabling the authors to address the trade‐offs that resource constraints may impose on their choice.

The authors employ a two‐sector endogenous growth model, with physical and human capital. Physical capital is produced in the final output sector, using human capital, physical capital, and government spending on infrastructure. Human capital is produced in the education sector using human capital, physical capital, and government spending on public education. The introduction of productive government spending in both sectors yields an important structural difference from the traditional two‐sector growth models in that the relative price of human to physical capital dynamics does not evolve independently of the quantity dynamics.

The model yields both a long‐run growth‐maximizing and welfare‐maximizing expenditure rate and allocation of expenditure on productive capital. The welfare‐maximizing rate of expenditure is less than the growth‐maximizing rate, with the opposite being the case with regard to their allocation. Moreover, the growth‐maximizing value of the expenditure rate is independent of the composition of government spending, and vice versa. Because of the complexity of the model, the analysis of its dynamics requires the use of numerical simulations the specific shocks analyzed being productivity increases. During the transition, the growth rates of the two forms of capital approach their common equilibrium from opposite directions, this depending upon both the sector in which the shock occurs and the relative sectoral capital intensities.

These findings confirm that the form in which the government carries out its productive expenditures is important. The authors have retained the simpler, but widely employed, assumption that government expenditure influences private productivity as a flow. But given the importance of public investment suggests that extending this analysis to focus on public capital would be useful.

Two‐sector models of economic growth have proven to be a powerful tool for analyzing a wide range of issues in economic growth. The originality of this paper is to consider the relative impact of government spending on infrastructure and government spending on human capital and the trade‐offs that they entail, both in the long run and over time.

We extend the Jones (1971) analysis of the effects of distortions in 2×2 trade models to the case of a two-sector dynamic general equilibrium model of a small open economy with capital accumulation. We do a comparative steady state analysis for the effect of policy changes on factor prices and the capital stock, and examine the dynamics of the system in the neighborhood of the steady state. We also show that the system will have multiple equilibria when value and physical factor intensity rankings of the sectors do not agree.

The chapter examines the core framework of A. C. Pigou’s Theory of Unemployment (TU) with the aim of providing a rational reconstruction of his analysis of the determinants of unemployment in the short period. This is accomplished without any comparison with Keynes’s criticism of TU, as often found in the previous literature.

I reconstruct Pigou’s two-sector model, which only accounted for output in the wage good sector but not in the non-wage good sector, as a complete two-sector model to reveal his implicit assumptions about the passive behaviour of non-wage earners in the non-wage good sector. I also find classical elements, most notably the wage fund doctrine and the hypothesis on profits, in Pigou’s approach, which partly explains why the model is incomplete when viewed in terms of its neoclassical elements. In the “A Rational Reconstruction of the Two-Sector Model” section, I sketch a mathematical model to make Pigou’s analysis consistent.

The chapter shows how unemployment is determined and how economic policy to deal with it is conceived in the work of a major exponent of the pre-Keynesian approach.

This paper studies the political economy of the endogenous urban–rural divide in two dimensions: labor market and provision of public goods.

This paper gives a dual-sector model endogenously depending on the consumption of public goods (club goods), the number of rural–urban migrants and the tax rate (transfer payments).

According to the research findings in this paper, the constraints on the participation of rural residents portray the rural residents' bargaining power, and in the game between the urban elites and the rural residents, tax rates depend on the preferences of the urban elites and the constraints urban elites and the rural residents jointly face. Therefore, the urban elites have to set tax rates deviating from the most preferred ones. The model in this paper can explain a series of empirical findings and yield new theoretical findings for empirical testing.

Significantly, the paper finds that the increase in agricultural productivity will lead to industrialization, accompanied by the disintegration of the dual-sector model. However, though the increase in industrial productivity can accelerate industrialization, it will further expand the urban–rural divide.

This article provides a detailed investigation of how Lewis revisited classical and Marxian concepts such as productive/unproductive labor, economic surplus, subsistence wages, reserve army, and capital accumulation in his investigation of economic development. The Lewis 1954 development model is compared to other models advanced at the time by Harrod, Domar, Swan, Kaldor, Solow, von Neumann, Nurkse, Rosenstein-Rodan, Myint, and others. Lewis applied the notion of economic duality to open and closed economies.

Most models attempting to give an account of trade-induced symmetric increase in wage inequality have abandoned the factor price equalization (FPE) framework. The present chapter retains the FPE framework and identifies a plausible route through which trade might increase wage inequality in all trading countries. A two-sector model with one constant returns sector producing basic goods and another increasing returns to scale sector producing fancy goods is developed. A quasi-linear utility function is used to capture the divide between basic and fancy goods. There are two types of productive factors, skilled and unskilled labour, and they differ with respect to their occupational options. Skilled labour can work both in the skill using fancy goods sector and in the unskilled labour using basic good producing sector, whereas unskilled labour is tied down to unskilled job. The model holds possibilities of multiple equilibria and under reasonable parameterization skill premium increases in all countries following trade.