Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Copyright -- Table of Contents -- Preface -- Board of Directors -- Acknowledgments -- Map -- Introduction -- PART I -- Chapter 1 -- Chapter 2 -- Chapter 3 -- Chapter 4 -- Chapter 5 -- PART II -- Chapter 6 -- Chapter 7 -- Chapter 8 -- Chapter 9 -- PART III -- Chapter 10 -- Chapter 11 -- Chapter 12 -- Chapter 13 -- Chapter 14 -- Timeline -- Abbreviations -- About the Contributors -- Index -- PIIE Publications List -- PIIE List of Distributors.

The economic aspects of archaeology are becoming increasingly emphasised by stakeholders inside and outside the discipline. However, archaeology is currently ill-equipped – conceptually and practically – to deal with the new demands this emphasis places. This research responds to that situation, develops and applies a new conceptual model fit to approach the use of archaeology as an economic asset, examines how archaeology's ability to act as an economic asset attracts value, and considers how archaeologists can best understand economic 'capital'. The thesis first examines current approaches to 'value' and 'economics' in cultural heritage management and cultural economics, identifying a damaging divide between the 'cultural' and the 'economic'. A 'Capital Model' is developed, which focuses on how value is created for the public and emphasises the equality and interrelationship of economic, social and cultural benefits of archaeological sites and materials. This research then analyses how the 'economic capital' of archaeology is currently used to create value for stakeholders and the public. Drawing on perspectives from environmental resource management, it examines the approaches of international organisations, national governments (focusing on the UK), and local heritage tourism projects. This analysis highlights the necessity, and current lack of, data and methodologies to measure the economic capital of archaeology. Available methodologies are examined and applied to the case study of Feynan, Jordan. Data on the quantity and distribution of the economic impact of the local archaeology, and its interaction with other social and cultural values, is collected to inform management strategies. The case study demonstrates the importance of archaeologists understanding the economic capital of archaeology.

The article presents an original Keynesian-institutional approach to studying the macroeconomic dynamics of a transitional economy (on the example of Russia). The article proposes theoretical provisions related to the inclusion of an assessment of the institutional factor in the distribution of national income, as well as an authorial approach to modeling the relationship between institutions and aggregate demand based on the construction of linear regression equations, including changes in consumption, investment and institutional environment. Currently, economists have a desire to revise the mainstream and increase the requirements for the explanatory ability of macroeconomic models. The views widespread in economic theory are increasingly criticized due to the predominance of econometric analysis over qualitative interpretations, the unrealistic hypotheses of the rationality of economic agents' behavior and the perfection of market mechanisms based on the assumption that it is possible to predict the future based on an analysis of the past. In order to solve the indicated problems, it is often proposed to use synthetic theories that combine the achievements of several schools of economic thought. One of these synthetic theories is Keynesian-institutional synthesis. The proposed approach is applied to assess the macroeconomic dynamics of the Russian economy, in which a decrease in consumption and investment volatility have been observed over the past five years, which is associated with macroeconomic stabilization and the development of social support institutions. However, the expectations of economic agents are rather unfavorable, and further measures are needed to stabilize aggregate demand. According to the analysis of official statistics, institutional factors significantly affect aggregate demand, but are not of priority. At the same time, the general conditions of the institutional environment have a stronger effect on investment than on consumption. On this basis, it has been concluded that the progress of institutions can not only accelerate economic growth, but also increase macroeconomic risks; therefore, it increases the responsibility of politicians for decisions in the field of economic regulation.