OPTIMAL GROWTH, GENUINE SAVINGS AND LONG-RUN DYNAMICS

Green accounting theories have shown that negative genuine savings at some point in time imply unsustainability. Consequently, recent studies advocate the use of the genuine savings measure for empirical testing: a negative index implies that sustainability be rejected. However, this criterion cannot ascertain sustainability, because positive current genuine savings do not rule out genuine dissaving in the future. This paper derives a one‐to‐one relationship between the sign of long‐run genuine savings and the limiting condition for sustained utility in the capital‐resource growth model, assuming technical progress and resource renewability. This result suggests to extend the genuine saving method to include a test of the limiting condition: if this condition is empirically rejected, positive current genuine savings are delivering a false message.     

Fostering the Industrial Component of the European Green Deal: Key Principles and Policy Options

Intereconomics - The necessity to meet climate and environmental targets, while at the same time ensuring economic and social sustainability,requires a transformation that will generate enough...     

Beyond survival: the implementation of new forms of work organization in the UK and German steel industries

This paper outlines and analyses the major changes in work-force organization that have been introduced by British and German steel producers in the past decade, against a backcloth of retrenchment in the industry, new product development and technological change. Including multiskilling, a reduction in demarcation and team–working, these changes have had a major effect upon the composition of the work–force and the nature of work undertaken at the shopfloor level.

While these changes have had a common broad trajectory, they have been introduced at a different pace and in different forms. The contrasts are provided not only at the international level, but between plants in the same countries. The paper further outlines the response of trade unions to these changes and the implications for industrial relations at the shopfloor level.     

The convertibility of the rouble

Conclusion After a relatively long period of discussion, characterised by an uncertain approach towards transition, the Soviet authorities are now moving with decision towards the market. This statement applies to the reform as a whole and in particular to convertibility.The convertibility process in the Soviet Union started from a relatively unfavourable position: not only because of the complete (internal and external) inconvertibility of the Rouble, but also because the country's past displays a sort of structural propensity towards inconvertibility.It took the Soviet authorities some years to dismiss the doctrine of a parallel currency and the idea that convertibility is the final step of the transition. Recent legislative production in the Soviet Union (in particular the Banking law and the Currency law) are a good sign that they are proceeding in the right direction and practical experience seems to confirm this statement.In 1991 the process has accelerated and more important progress was made towards unification of the exchange rates and the creation of a currency market: these are two steps which are fundamental for achieving partial external convertibility (current account operations made by non-residents), which in its turn is the first step towards broader convertibility. Probably within the end of the year external partial convertibility will be reached. This at last will increase the foreign contribution to the Soviet economy, thus improving domestic conditions. The events of August 1991 will most likely further accelerate the pace of the process, which is now without doubt irreversible.Even if qualitatively positive results are achieved in the reform process however, great effort must still be made not only to complete and consolidate these results, but also to proceed further towards internal and financial convertibility.     

The premiss-based approach to judgment aggregation

In the framework of judgment aggregation, we assume that some formulas of the agenda are singled out as premisses, and that both Independence (formula-wise aggregation) and Unanimity Preservation hold for them. Whether premiss-based aggregation thus defined is compatible with conclusion-based aggregation, as defined by Unanimity Preservation on the non-premisses, depends on how the premisses are logically connected, both among themselves and with other formulas. We state necessary and sufficient conditions under which the combination of both approaches leads to dictatorship (resp. oligarchy), either just on the premisses or on the whole agenda. Our analysis is inspired by the doctrinal paradox of legal theory and is arguably relevant to this field as well as political science and political economy. When the set of premisses coincides with the whole agenda, a limiting case of our assumptions, we obtain several existing results in judgment aggregation theory.