Search results

A crucial factor in economic growth - the supply of entrepreneurship - is largely neglected in modern economic theory. The main reason is that the theory is dominated by the model of perfect competition, which logically excludes any function for the entrepreneur. The standard model is also inconsistent with several obvious facts. Instead, the author proposes two alternative models of 'entrepreneurial competition', one for conditions of near-perfect competition in product markets and the other for imperfect competition in those markets.

According to the empirical results expounded in the paper, the European Union?s economic growth since the 1960s has proceeded in many respects in conformity with regularities similar to those of the German economy. A combined influence was exerted by growth mechanism regularities, economic policy and international economic relations. Using models of mathematical economics, the author analyses the main relationships. The most important conclusion on the basis of empirical results is that the relatively slow economic growth of our days may be accelerated by a switch to a growth-oriented economic policy.

On one level, history is used by all parts of the International Relations (IR) discipline. But lurking beneath the surface of IR's approach to history lies a well-entrenched binary. Whereas mainstream positions use history as a means to fill in their theoretical frames (seeing history as a kind of 'scripture' of abstract lessons), many post-positivists reduce history to a pick-and-mix of contingent hiccups (a 'butterfly' of what-ifs and maybes). Interestingly enough, this binary is one reproduced throughout the social sciences. As such, there is a bigger story to the apparently 'eternal divide' between history and social science than first meets the eye. This article uses the various ways in which history is used -- and abused -- in IR to probe more deeply into the relationship between history and social science as a whole. This exploration reveals four frameworks, two drawn from history (context and narrative) and two drawn from social science (eventfulness and ideal-typification) which illustrate the necessary co-implication of the two enterprises. The article employs these tools as a means of re-imagining the relationship between history and social science (including IR), conceiving this as a single intellectual journey in which both are permanently in view. [Reprinted by permission; copyright Sage Publications Ltd. & ECPR-European Consortium for Political Research.]

AbstractGlobal philanthropy is a significant source of financial resources in contemporary international relations, and it has provoked intense debates about the appropriateness of involving private foundations in global policymaking. Despite these facts, International Relations as a discipline has shown remarkably little reference to philanthropy as an important and relevant actor in global politics. In this article, I make the case for explicitly incorporating philanthropy into international relations analyses. Drawing on both historical examples and contemporary cases from the global health space, I show how philanthropy exerts a unique and independent influence within international society and that it needs to be understood holistically rather than focusing solely on individual philanthropic organisations. I also discuss how this expanding influence raises serious questions about accountability and legitimacy. Rather than making an argument about the appropriateness of philanthropy's involvement in international society, this article aims to make the case for philanthropy's analytical inclusion within the discipline.

In the 1980s a large number of Latin American countries undertook stabilization and structural adjustment programmes similar, though smaller in magnitude, to the ones that Eastern Europe is now undergoing. In this book, economists from four different Eastern European countries analyze the relevance of the Latin American experience for their own countries in the areas of fiscal policy, privatization, monetary policy, and the external sector. The book also contains two chapters with the perspective of Latin Americans as well as a synthesis of the entire volume.