Suchergebnisse

Bien que l'allocation et la distribution des ressources rares soient les objets traditionnels de l'analyse économique, ressources naturelles et environnement ont longtemps été négligés en raison de leur nature souvent non marchande. En outre, l'horizon normatif de l'économie étant généralement l'efficacité, la question de la répartition des ressources naturelles et de la qualité environnementale peine encore à trouver sa place. L'économie de l'environnement et des ressources naturelles, qui s'intéresse aux problèmes de pollution et à l'exploitation optimale des ressources, raisonne dans un cadre qui permet difficilement de penser les inégalités d'environnement pour elles-mêmes. Mais les enjeux de justice font trop souvent irruption dans les débats environnementaux pour n'être pas traités, et les économistes en sont de plus en plus conscients. De son côté, le courant de l'économie écologique porte un intérêt particulier à la justice sociale dans le cadre de limites écologiques du développement. De nombreux travaux en relevant interrogent les disparités socio-économiques dans la relation à l'environnement. La question de la justice environnementale et des conflits socio-environnementaux y a d'ailleurs une place importante. Nous proposons dans cet article un tour d'horizon critique et non exhaustif des apports de l'économie à l'étude des inégalités sociales d'environnement.

L'Indice de richesse inclusive (IWI) est issu de la théorie économique standard de la soutenabilité, entendue comme préservation d'une somme pondérée de capitaux supposés contribuer au bien-être intergénérationnel. Cet indicateur semble voué à occuper une place importante dans la poursuite d'un développement soutenable, notamment dans les pays en développement. Nous proposons une analyse critique de l'indicateur et du cadre théorique dont il est issu. L'analyse met au jour des problèmes méthodologiques, épistémologiques et normatifs. Elle montre ensuite que ces limites ne sont pas mises en exergue par les critères usuels de qualité statistique. Nous concluons sur la nécessité de développer une épistémologie alternative pour évaluer la quantification de la soutenabilité.

International audience ; This paper seeks to characterize the importance of the social and political dimensions of the literature dedicated to water in the field of ecological economics. It attempts to assess the relevance of Spash's division of the community into three "camps", namely "new resource economists", "social ecological economists" and "new environmental pragmatists" through the literature focusing on water issues published in leading scientific journals. We begin with an analysis of the main ontological, epistemological and methodological tenets of the three "camps". We then analyze the relevance and limits of such categorization for water research through papers published in Ecological Economics. We then explore the field of ecological economics of water through textual statistics obtained from research abstracts published in five selected journals since the late 1980s. Our results raise questions regarding the relevance of the partition of the ecological economics community thanks to a Venn diagram that presents limited overlaps. We promote an inclusive representation of the "big tent" of ecological economics, thus suggesting new perspectives for the debate on methodological pluralism in Ecological Economics. To conclude, a series of recommendations are suggested to promote water social ecological eco- nomics, and strengthen pluralism within the community.

International audience ; This paper seeks to characterize the importance of the social and political dimensions of the literature dedicated to water in the field of ecological economics. It attempts to assess the relevance of Spash's division of the community into three "camps", namely "new resource economists", "social ecological economists" and "new environmental pragmatists" through the literature focusing on water issues published in leading scientific journals. We begin with an analysis of the main ontological, epistemological and methodological tenets of the three "camps". We then analyze the relevance and limits of such categorization for water research through papers published in Ecological Economics. We then explore the field of ecological economics of water through textual statistics obtained from research abstracts published in five selected journals since the late 1980s. Our results raise questions regarding the relevance of the partition of the ecological economics community thanks to a Venn diagram that presents limited overlaps. We promote an inclusive representation of the "big tent" of ecological economics, thus suggesting new perspectives for the debate on methodological pluralism in Ecological Economics. To conclude, a series of recommendations are suggested to promote water social ecological eco- nomics, and strengthen pluralism within the community.

International audience ; This paper seeks to characterize the importance of the social and political dimensions of the literature dedicated to water in the field of ecological economics. It attempts to assess the relevance of Spash's division of the community into three "camps", namely "new resource economists", "social ecological economists" and "new environmental pragmatists" through the literature focusing on water issues published in leading scientific journals. We begin with an analysis of the main ontological, epistemological and methodological tenets of the three "camps". We then analyze the relevance and limits of such categorization for water research through papers published in Ecological Economics. We then explore the field of ecological economics of water through textual statistics obtained from research abstracts published in five selected journals since the late 1980s. Our results raise questions regarding the relevance of the partition of the ecological economics community thanks to a Venn diagram that presents limited overlaps. We promote an inclusive representation of the "big tent" of ecological economics, thus suggesting new perspectives for the debate on methodological pluralism in Ecological Economics. To conclude, a series of recommendations are suggested to promote water social ecological eco- nomics, and strengthen pluralism within the community.

François Quesnay's Tableau, as it appears in Philosophie rurale, is an understandable, robust, and innovative construction despite detail errors. It provides a precise representation of the economic circuit. We introduce the accounts of chapter VII of Philosophie rurale and we explain how Quesnay's Tableau comes from these accounts. The transposition of the accounts of chapter VII and of the Tableau into two input-output tables shows the balance of resources and uses. In order to shed light on the progress of exchanges along the year, the Tableau is also transposed into three double-entry accountings (proprietors, farmers, and artisans).

Entre plafond écologique et plancher social, Bruxelles repense son économie en s'appuyant sur la théorie du Donut. Comment la capitale européenne se saisit-elle de cet outil ? Retour d'expérience.