Showing posts with label growth model. Show all posts
Showing posts with label growth model. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 9, 2018

Michael Löwy — Marx’s ecology: recovered legacy

While mainstream ecological theory has been dismissive of Karl Marx, serious research in recent decades has recovered some of his very important insights on ecological issues. The pioneers have been James O’Connor and the journal Capitalism, Nature and Socialism—a tradition continued by Joel Kovel—but the most systematic and thorough investigations on Marx’s ecological views are those of John Bellamy Foster and his friends from Monthly Review.
Many ecologists accuse Marx of “productivism.” Is this accusation justified? No, insofar as nobody denounced as much as Marx the capitalist logic of production for production: the accumulation of capital, wealth and commodities as an aim in itself.
The fundamental idea of a socialist economy—contrary to its miserable bureaucratic caricatures—is one of producing use-values, goods which are necessary for the satisfaction of human needs. Moreover, the main importance of technical progress for Marx was not the infinite growth of goods (“having”) but the reduction of the labour journey and the increase of free time (“being”).
In the being-doing-having model, being is more important than doing. Doing follows from being. Doing is more than having in that having is a by-product of doing. Happiness is a property of being that accrues from unfolding one's potential as a person (human being) and as an individual (particular personality).

In the consumerist model, having in most important, and doing is the sine qua non of having. Being largely irrelevant in this model, so genuine happiness is precluded. This results in alienation.

In contemporary capitalism, based on the consumer economy, consumerism replaces the increased leisure made available by increases in productivity. Freedom gets traded for trinkets, promoted by advertising, so that firms can maintain profits. One result of consumerism in addition to alienation is ecological degradation.

MROnline
Marx’s ecology: recovered legacy
Michael Löwy | emeritus research director in social sciences at the CNRS (French National Center of Scientific Research) and lectures at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS; Paris, France)

Saturday, October 17, 2015

Paul Romer — Speeding-up and Missed Opportunities: Evidence


Paul Romer is up with another thought-provoking post today.
The bar I set for a model is that it should yield answers we believe to questions that matter. For a model of growth, the two questions that matter most are:
1. Speeding-up: Why has the rate of growth at the technological frontier been increasing over time?
2. Missed Opportunities: Why have so many countries that start from far behind the frontier failed to achieve rapid catch-up growth?
This month, I’m writing a series of posts in response to a nudge from Joshua Gans noting that this is the 25th anniversary of the publication of my paper Endogenous Technological Change, JPE (1990). In this post, I’ll recapitulate the evidence that convinced me when I was writing the 1990 paper that these are the two big questions that growth theory should address. In a subsequent post, I’ll explain why the conceptual framework that I used in the 1990 paper, one that relies on partially excludable nonrival goods, is the bare minimum for answering them.
Interestingly, this is similar to the model that China used in playing catch up. So did the USSR, whose progress in industrializing a chiefly agricultural economy is usually underestimated in the West. Public enterprise also the field in which Mariana Mazzucato has been working.

For reference, see Public Goods.

Paul Romer's Blog
Speeding-up and Missed Opportunities: Evidence
Paul Romer | University Professor at NYU and director of the Marron Institute of Urban Management
ht Brad DeLong