Economics - Romania

Analysis of the pre-1989 situation; Redefinition of the discipline since 1990; Core theoretical and methodological orientations; Thematic orientation and funding; Public space and academic debates; Views on further development

The Ostroms on Self-Governance:The Importance of Cybernetics

The paper reveals a novel and perhaps surprising ingredient in the mix of influences that inspired and informed the work of Elinor and Vincint Ostrom on self-governance: cybernetics, understood as a theory of control via feedback mechanisms. Based on this crucial insight, the paper portrays self-governance as involving an architecture of multiple levels of so-called ‘second order’ feedback mechanisms. Such compounded systems of organisation are the key to understanding any self-governance process and the paper argues that their intrinsic logic provides a critical link between the work of the Ostroms and the public choice and constitutional political economy perspectives on institutional order. The paper thereby offers both a fresh perspective on the Ostromian view of self-governance and also of also of governance theory in general

Russia’s Digital Economy Program : An Effective Strategy for Digital Transformation?

Peer reviewe

Seeing Polycentrically: Examining Governance Situations Using a Polycentricity Lens

Because many types of governance can be polycentric, an observer faces a challenge in trying to identify and understand polycentric governance in actual settings. This chapter adopts the perspective of thinking about polycentricity as a lens through which to view governance situations. We take an inquiry approach, considering how one might determine whether and in what ways a given governance situation demonstrates the characteristics of polycentric governance. We proceed through a series of questions an observer could pose as part of 'seeing polycentrically', i.e., looking at the aspects and dimensions of polycentric governance introduced in Stephan, Marshall, and McGinnis as a way of building an understanding of a governance situation. We attempt to describe why these queries are important and how posing and answering these questions helps in examining and understanding the situation. We close the chapter by considering the challenges of assessing the operation of polycentric governance arrangements

Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning

Despite some recent progress, scenario planning’s development as an academic discipline remains constrained by the perception it is solely a practical tool for thinking about the future, with limited theoretical foundations. The paper addresses this issue by showing that G. L. S. Shackle’s ‘Potential Surprise Theory’ (PST) contains much that can lend theoretical support to scenario planning - especially its use of plausibility rather than probability, and its focus on potential extreme outcomes. Moreover, PST and scenario planning share the same ontology, viewing the future as constructed by the imagination of individuals. Yet, under PST, while the future is imagined and, therefore, subjective, individuals nevertheless seek to identify the ‘best’ option through a deductive process of elimination. PST therefore assists in overcoming the divide between the constructivist and deductivist perspectives in scenario planning as it employs both. Finally, the paper shows that theoretically underpinning scenario planning with PST would place it at the heart of contemporary debates on decision making under uncertainty taking place in economics and other fields, enhancing its status and profile as a discipline

Advantages of a Polycentric Approach to Climate Change Policy

Lack of progress in global climate negotiations has led scholars to reconsider polycentric approaches to climate policy. Several examples of subglobal mechanisms to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions have been touted, but it remains unclear why they might achieve better climate outcomes than global negotiations alone. Decades of work conducted by researchers associated with the Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis at Indiana University have emphasized two chief advantages of polycentric approaches over monocentric ones: they provide more opportunities for experimentation and learning to improve policies over time, and they increase communications and interactions — formal and informal, bilateral and multilateral — among parties to help build the mutual trust needed for increased cooperation. A wealth of theoretical, empirical and experimental evidence supports the polycentric approach

Where diversity comes from and why it matters?

In this essay, I describe some of the benefits of cognitive diversity in a complex world as well as the origins of that diversity. The essay has two main parts sandwiched between a brief description of what I mean by diversity and complexity, as well as a brief discussion of whether social systems produce sufficient diversity. In the first part, I describe models that provide insight into why we see the levels of diversity that we do. These models rest on social psychological foundations but borrow ideas from economics as well as population genetics. In the second part, I describe the functional benefits of diversity. I show how diverse predictive models can make a collection of people better able to make accurate predictions, how diverse perspectives and heuristics can enable groups of problem solvers to find innovative new solutions to problems, and how diverse behaviors and representations of the world can make a society more robust. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/107520/1/ejsp2016.pd

Environment change, economy change and reducing conflict at source

At a time when fossil fuel burning, nationalism, ethnic and religious intolerance, and other retrograde steps are being promoted, the prospects for world peace and environmental systems stability may appear dim. Yet now is it the more important to continue to examine the sources of conflict. A major obstacle to general progress is the currently dominant economic practice and theory, which is here called the economy-as-usual, or economics-as-usual, as appropriate. A special obstacle to constructive change is the language in which economic matters are usually discussed. This language is narrow, conservative, technical and often obscure. The rapid changes in the environment (physical and living) are largely kept in a separate compartment. If, however, the partition is removed, economics -as-usual, with its dependence on growth and its widening inequality, is seen to be unsustainable. Radical economic change, for better or worse, is to be expected. Such change is here called economy change. The change could be for the better if it involved an expansion of the concept of economics itself, along the lines of oikonomia, a modern revival of a classical Greek term for management or household. In such an expanded view, not everything of economic value can be measured. It is argued that economics-as-usual is the source of much strife. Some features are indicated of a less conflictual economy - more just, cooperative and peaceful. These features include a dignified life available to all people as of right, the word 'wealth' being reconnected with weal, well and well-being, and 'work' being understood as including all useful activity

Quality standards in polycentric systems : a case of shipping

This article contributes to the literature on transnational environmental governance (TEG). Polycentricity is a popular conceptual approach in TEG, but coordination in polycentric systems remains largely unexplored. We put forward a conceptual model of quality standards as a productive links between different orders of governance in polycentric systems. Existing theories distinguish between regulative, institutional, and normalizing functioning of quality standards. We develop an integrative approach highlighting the mechanisms of coordination that rely on these three functions of quality standards. The case of TEG in shipping is used to illustrate how quality standards function not only as soft rules, but also as institutionalized references and shared conventions, enabling coordination across levels and scales. The paper draws attention to the limits of regulatory standardization, outlining how practical value can be gained from emphasizing the normative work associated with promulgation of quality standards.Peer reviewe