Неокласична економска теорија и проблеми економског развоја (Neoclassical Economic Theory and the Problems of Economic Development)
Serbian Abstract: У раду се разматрају карактеристике савремене владајуће неокласичне економске теорије и њен однос према проблемима економског развоја. Показује се да, с претпоставкама једнаке вредности и значаја свих делатности, и свемоћи саморегулишућег тржишта, она нема могућности и снаге да објасни факторе економског развоја, настанка и ширења сиромаштва, како у некој засебно узетој земљи тако и у међународним односима. Као нова парадигма, која треба да је замени, истиче се Други канон, који се заснива на вишевековној традицији и биолошким метафорама. Он води порекло из епохе Ренесансе, потврђен је вишевековним искуством савремених развијених привреда, кроз примену политика које оне данас забрањују за примену неразвијеним земљама, док их оне саме користе. За разлику од неокласичних политика, оваплоћених у (нео)либералној политици Вашингтонског договора, које доводе до деиндустријализације, политике Другог канона, засноване на политикама обрасца Маршаловог плана, доводе насупрот томе до индустријализације као претпоставке изласка неразвијених земаља из кризе и сиромаштва. Замена неокласичне економске парадигме појављује се у том смислу и као претпоставка увећања квалитета макроекономског образовања и дужна је да обезбеди боље разумевање економских проблема и процеса.English Abstract: Paper considers the characteristics of contemporary dominant neoclascical economic theory and their relation to economic development. It was showed that it, with presumptions of the same value and significance of all economic activities, and borderless power of self-regulated market, not have possibilities and force to explain factors of economic development, genesis and widening of poverty, as in one separate country as in international relations. As new paradigm, that should to change neoclascical, it is emphasized Other canon, that is on many centuries tradition and biological metaphors grounded. That dates back to the Renaissance, was proved through experience of the now developed economies, through the use of policies that in contemporary world are forbidden for the underdeveloped countries, while the developed that use. Contrary to neoclassical policies, realized in (neo)liberal politics of Washington consensus, that lead to de-industrialization, policies of the Other canon, on policies like Marshall plan grounded, lead contrary to industrialization as the condition to leave the underdeveloped countries from crisis and poverty. Change of neoclassical economic paradigm in this sense is the condition for the growth of the quality of macroeconomic education and should to ensure better understanding of economic problems and processes.
Transition in Serbia: Foundations, Results and Perspectives
Paper considers the foundations, results and perspectives of transition process in Serbia. The foundations were the postulates of neoclassical economics, the mainstream in recent economic thought. They determined the goal, the methodology, and the ideological basis of this process, and resulted especially in Washington Consensus. The results of the reforms, based on Consensus, showed, with some exceptions, that Serbia, as the other former socialist countries, realized deep and long-term economic fall, followed by similar processes in other spheras. Contrary to ordinary opinions that transition crisis show as result of inconsistency in reforms taking, the paper argues that this is normally its result. As an analogue is the Morgenthau’s plan for West Germany observed, that has promoted Germany to industrial disarmament, and that would lead to its poverty and its transformation into raw material basis for the developed economies, and to impossibility of survival of the existing number of population. Fortunately for the Germany, Morgenthau’s plan was abandoned and Marshall’s plan was introduced. It leads to industrial renewal of Germany. For the transition countries it is also necessary, considering the practice and basic principles of the Other Canon, which have they, origins as far as from the economic policy of Henry VII, to access re-industrialization in the same way, which is the necessity for renewal of economies, and for overcoming the long-term crisis.
Complexity, Network-Decisions And Alternative Risk Premia: Some New Theories Of Structural Change And Portfolio Decisions.
Structural Change is the basis for many decisions such as government fiscal and monetary policies, government interventions, corporate-expenditure decisions, corporate strategic decisions, portfolio management decisions in finance; household allocation decisions, etc.. Structural change in industries and national economies is increasingly more difficult to detect partly because of the growth and dominance of Complex Systems and “Networks” in modern industries and economies – such Networks and Complex Systems include GVCs (global value chains), retail store networks; franchising networks; internet networks; services networks; credit-chains in industries; online social networks; etc.. The relationship between Complexity and Structural Change is well established in the physics, applied math and economic dynamics literatures. Traditional definitions and modeling of structural change have erroneously focused on changes in labor, technological progress, market share, and or capital – which are grossly inadequate in the new economy and post- global financial crisis (as confirmed by changes in the global retailing and housing industries and other industries). Also the modeling of structural change seems to be constrained by the availability of data, and often omits the relationship between structural change on one hand, and globalization, financial stability and international financial contagion. This article: i) introduces the Operations Strategy Model of structural change, explains how it differs from the Lewis Model of Structural Change; and explains the often omitted relationship between operations strategy (of companies and government agencies) and structural change; ii) introduces other new Complexity-based models/theories of Structural Change in industries; iii) reviews the relationships among Operations Research, Complexity and Structural Change; iv) explains the symbiotic relationship between structural change on one hand, and economic growth, financial stability, financial contagion and globalization; v) discusses the significant gap between academic research and practice and explains some issues and factors that should be considered in the development and testing of structural change models; vi) explains how alternative risk premia can be generated from new models of Structural Change.