Brexit: A Cliff Edge or a Small Bump in the Road?

It is becoming increasingly accepted, not least by the Prime Minister and opposition leadership, that the negotiation of a comprehensive trade relationship with the EU is necessary to prevent the UK economy falling off a ‘cliff edge’. This concern is shaping the UK's strategy towards negotiations with the EU and has provided at least part of the motivation for the UK to consider requesting a transition period to facilitate the Brexit process. But how accurate are these fears? What evidence is there for the existence of a ‘cliff edge’? How disastrous would it be for the UK to revert to trading with the EU on the same basis as most other countries in the world, namely according to World Trade Organisation rules? This article seeks to address these issues and it highlights a number of implications for policy makers which flow from understanding the available evidence a little more clearly.     

Is cross-border cooperation underpinned by an ethical code of values? A theoretical analysis

Is there an ‘ethical code’ of values that underpins cross-border cooperation activities? By focusing on people as ‘agents’, the article argues that citizens and individuals in their integral development have been neglected so far when the development of cross-border spaces is scrutinized. This study aims to provide an alternative theoretical framework through which cross-border activities can be analysed and operationalized. This is done by synergically reading Benedict XVI’s ‘Caritas in Veritate’ and Sen’s ‘Development as Freedom’. It is suggested that the ethical dimension of cross-border cooperation activities needs to be scrutinized on the ground that cross-border spaces are neither ethically neutral, nor inherently inhuman and opposed to society. They are instead part and parcel of human activities and must be structured and governed in an ethical manner. It follows that ethical values are the means of cohesion in cross-border zones. Without including them in the analysis, real cohesion cannot be achieved.     

Marxism Beyond the Economy and Exploitation Beyond the Wage

Since its inception Marxism has largely operated with a narrow definition of the economy which closely resembles capitalism’s own, focusing on wage labor as the pre-eminent example of capitalist relations of labor. A century-long series of challenges from heterodox radical economists, including those based in feminism and anti-colonial theory, has yet to broaden this definition of capitalism, but the fading importance of wage labor and the advent of new forms of precarious labor relations may allow us to break the hold of restrictive ideas of the economy. A larger, more comprehensive concept of economics locates value production and material exploitation in many forms of labor in addition to waged work, and provides a theoretical platform for building solidarity among seemingly disparate movements and constituencies. Marxism can and must incorporate critiques if it is to have continuing relevance. In fact, Marx’s original understanding of capitalism included the concepts of primitive accumulation and the reproduction of labor power, allowing broader concepts of capitalist exploitation to be incorporated into the Marxist worldview. New insights into the essential nature of capitalism and new possibilities for organizing and change may emerge from this paradigm shift.     

Why economics needs to be distinguished from physics,and why economists need to talk to physicists: a response to Foster and Holleman

Foster and Holleman argue that the systems ecologist H.T. Odum offered a valid theoretical framework for conceptualizing ecologically unequal exchange, and demonstrate its affinity with the Marxian theory of unequal exchange of embodied labour. However, both approaches suffer from the same fundamental confusion of the biophysical and the economic. The affinity between labour and energy theories of the unequal exchange of value was demonstrated by S.C. Lonergan already in 1988, but to thus define asymmetric transfers of biophysical resources in terms of underpaid ‘use values’ is misleading. Foster's recent endorsement of Odum is inconsistent with his earlier rejection of Odum's intellectual ancestor S. Podolinsky. While the ambition to ecologize Marx is laudable, it is in the interests of correct historiography and contemporary environmental justice activism to untangle some of the analytical problems in Foster and Holleman's article. A major problem is their failure to acknowledge the implications of N. Georgescu-Roegen's conceptualization of the relation between economics and thermodynamics.     

论当代中国马克思主义政治经济学的新境界

政治经济学与经济学的主要区别在于是否研究生产关系。马克思主义政治经济学用唯物主义的自然史的方法论述经济关系。当代中国马克思主义政治经济学有如下新境界：准确把握中国社会主要矛盾的变化,准确把握中国经济新常态,创新宏观调控思路和方式等。历史发展没有止境,当代中国马克思主义政治经济学新境界的开拓也没有止境。而要不断开拓当代中国马克思主义政治经济学的新境界,需要有科学的方法论和正确的思考方式,既着眼当前又立足长远,做到“六个坚持”,具有批判精神,尤其是必须深入学习马克思主义政治经济学的基本原理和习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想。     

“一带一路”背景下国际发展经济学学科综述

国际发展研究是反映现实世界变化的窗口之一。最近几年的发展经济学文献对诸如援助的动因、援助有效性等传统议题的研究更为深入,对新议题的探索也逐渐涌现。移民问题、局部地区的战争与恐怖主义活动与援助的相互关系,援助是如何塑造受援国行为及其所产生的效果,是反映援助国政治诉求的现实性研究。除此之外,源自其他学科的新研究方法也丰富了学者们对传统议题研究手段,补充了传统研究方法在诸如内生性等问题上存在的缺陷。     

30年来涉台经济研究的研究范式与方法演进——基于历年《台湾研究集刊》所发表论文的分类分析

本文以近30年来《台湾研究集刊》中发表的涉台经济研究类论文作为对象,对其中所采用的各种范式方法加以分类归纳比较,分析该领域研究范式和方法的时间演进特征。结果表明,20世纪80年代涉台经济研究的范式注重文献信息的丰富程度,主要采用数量描述和文献归纳方法,但逻辑论证的精度不足;20世纪90年代更为关注研究的实用性,倚重逻辑推理和理论演绎方法的运用,逻辑深度有所加强,逻辑精度也有一定提高;2000年以后则同时向实用性和理论性两个方向发展,既注重研究对于实践的指导意义,也开始引入主流经济学中的经验研究范式用于理论检验和创新。各种研究范式和方法互为补充参照,由此才能不断推进涉台经济研究的科学化进程。     

知识经济背景下国际产业转移研究新趋势

新的国际背景下,传统产业转移理论对国际产业转移的新趋势的解释力逐渐失去了效力,迫切需要有新的突破和发展。文章从弗农产品生命周期理论、比较优势理论、雁行模式理论、产业梯度转移理论、国际分工理论、内部化理论、西方中心论、可持续发展理论等方面分析了国际产业转移发展的新问题,并提出了国际产业转移发展的新动向,认为国际产业转移理论正向东道国、知识因素、产业链、产业风险、跨国公司等方面的互动理论方向发展。     

对波斯纳与科斯法经济学范式的解析

波斯纳以经济学打开法学的"黑箱",科斯以法学打开经济学"黑箱",作为经济学和法学交叉学科的法经济学由此形成两种理论范式,即法律的经济分析和经济的法律分析.波斯纳创立的法律的经济分析范式在为繁荣法经济学研究作出巨大贡献的同时也带来了极大的误区.重新繁荣法经济学研究,必须进行经济的法律分析.     

追求幸福生活是经济学与哲学的共同旨归

经济学与哲学都是探求人类幸福生活的学问。经济学认为财富增长是达到人类幸福生活的主要途径；而哲学更多地认为幸福生活的本真在于内心的安宁、道德上的至善和人际关系的熔融。经济学的过度使用是工具理性的滥用，而哲学的唯我独尊导致价值理性的专权。只有科学发展观才在两者之间占据着不偏不倚的位置，是沟通经济学与哲学，直达幸福生活的桥梁。