The economy of ancient Egypt is a difficult area of study due to the lack of preservation of much data (especially quantitative data); it is also a controversial subject on which widely divergent views have been expressed. It is certain, however, that the principal production and revenues of Egyptian society as a whole and of its individual members was agrarian, and as such, dependent on the yearly rising and receding of the Nile. Most agricultural producers were probably self-sufficient tenant farmers who worked the fields owned by wealthy individuals or state and temple estates. In addition to these, there were institutional and corvée workforces, and slaves, but the relative importance of these groups for society as a whole is difficult to assess. According to textual evidence, crafts were in the hands of institutional workforces, but indications also exist of craftsmen working for private contractors. Trade was essentially barter with reference to fixed units of textile, grain, copper, silver, and gold as measures of value. Coins were imported and produced in the Late Period, but a system close to a monetary economy is attested only from the Ptolemaic Period onward. Marketplaces were frequented by private individuals (including women) as well as professional traders, both native and foreign. Imports were secured by conquests and military control in the Levant, from which silver, oil, and wine reached Egypt, and in Nubia, rich in its deposits of gold.
The economy of ancient Egypt is a difficult area of study due to the lack of preservation of much data (especially quantitative data); it is also a controversial subject on which widely divergent views have been expressed. It is certain, however, that the principal production and revenues of Egyptian society as a whole and of its individual members was agrarian, and as such, dependent on the yearly rising and receding of the Nile. Most agricultural producers were probably self-sufficient tenant farmers who worked the fields owned by wealthy individuals or state and temple estates. In addition to these, there were institutional and corvée workforces, and slaves, but the relative importance of these groups for society as a whole is difficult to assess. According to textual evidence, crafts were in the hands of institutional workforces, but indications also exist of craftsmen working for private contractors. Trade was essentially barter with reference to fixed units of textile, grain, copper, silver, and gold as measures of value. Coins were imported and produced in the Late Period, but a system close to a monetary economy is attested only from the Ptolemaic Period onward. Marketplaces were frequented by private individuals (including women) as well as professional traders, both native and foreign. Imports were secured by conquests and military control in the Levant, from which silver, oil, and wine reached Egypt, and in Nubia, rich in its deposits of gold.
The economy of ancient Egypt is a difficult area of study due to the lack of preservation of much data (especially quantitative data); it is also a controversial subject on which widely divergent views have been expressed. It is certain, however, that the principal production and revenues of Egyptian society as a whole and of its individual members was agrarian, and as such, dependent on the yearly rising and receding of the Nile. Most agricultural producers were probably self-sufficient tenant farmers who worked the fields owned by wealthy individuals or state and temple estates. In addition to these, there were institutional and corvée workforces, and slaves, but the relative importance of these groups for society as a whole is difficult to assess. According to textual evidence, crafts were in the hands of institutional workforces, but indications also exist of craftsmen working for private contractors. Trade was essentially barter with reference to fixed units of textile, grain, copper, silver, and gold as measures of value. Coins were imported and produced in the Late Period, but a system close to a monetary economy is attested only from the Ptolemaic Period onward. Marketplaces were frequented by private individuals (including women) as well as professional traders, both native and foreign. Imports were secured by conquests and military control in the Levant, from which silver, oil, and wine reached Egypt, and in Nubia, rich in its deposits of gold.
Political economy has become divorced from normative political theory, resulting in an uncritical economic science and a political philosophy that has little critical purchase on actually existing economicpractices. The Foundational Economy Collective works within a framework of moral economy and uses the concepts of capabilities and use-value to radically reorient our conception of how our economy – or economies – should work.
The Circular Economy model 'closes the loop' of industrial supply chains to reintegrate energy and waste by-products into the economic cycle. It thus places the spotlight on the potential of re-use, recycling, and renewable energy sources as part of the overall economy. Knowing about Circular Economy means knowing about the following three, as they are particularly relevant to the Textiles & Clothing business:Research and policies for the Circular Economy, identifying the main actors developing the conceptConcepts and models for the T&C industry, with examples of how specific ideas within the Circular Economy paradigm are particularly relevant to Business Labs.R&D and related initiatives in the T&C industry, with a listing of projects dealing with specific technologies for reducing waste, recycling textiles, etc.Finally, action strategies are listed as suggestions for TCBL business pilots to incorporate the Circular Economy in their activities.A new policy frameworkThe traditional supply chain model for industrial production claims to add value at different steps from raw materials to the end consumer, but fails to adequately account for waste and pollution. In fact, the environment is considered as an infinite resource for raw materials on the one hand, and an infinite sink in which to dump waste and chemical by-products on the other.The Circular Economy model closes the loop by re-connecting linear value chains, considering one process's waste as another process's raw material. The Ellen Macarthur Foundation defines the Circular Economy as follows:"A circular economy is one that is restorative and regenerative by design, and which aims to keep products, components and materials at their highest utility and value at all times, distinguishing between technical and biological cycles."The Circular Economy concept has recently been adopted with great emphasis by the European Commission, in a series of Communications and funding programmes launched in December, 2015. This includes proposed directives on waste, packaging waste, landfill, and electrical and electronic waste, the introduction of a specific "cross-cutting focus area" in the H2020 2016-2017 work programme, and policy frameworks for the ESIF (EU Structural and Investment Funds) with a particular eye on Smart Specialisation. Since the Circular Economy appears to be emerging as a new policy framework, it is important to underline it's significant relevance for the T&C industry. First, as a general model, the Circular Economy model transforms environmental policies from a 'punitive' to an 'opportunity' approach, and can thus be used to leverage business innovation in a positive light. Secondly, the Circular Economy provides a framework for many of the qualitative aspects related to innovative T&C approaches: systems resilience, the role of diversity, emotionally durable design, and so forth. Finally, the Circular Economy provides a unifying framework for many specific fields of research and innovation that are ongoing for some time now in the T&C sector. Research and Policies for the Circular EconomySeveral research institutes and foundations have dedicated activities or even been constituted to investigate the Circular Economy, its implications, and related business models. This includes the following organisations.The Ellen Macarthur FoundationEstablished in 2010, this foundation aims to accelerate the transition to the circular economy. The charity's work focuses on four interlinking areas: education, business and government, insight and analysis, and communications. The main global partners include: Cisco, Google, H&M, Intesa Sanpaolo, Kingfisher, Philips, Renault, and Unilever.Circle EconomyThis is a cooperative consisting of two groups: Circle of Action, with members implementing concrete initiatives, and Circle of Consciousness, with a strategic guidance function. Circle Economy is developing a roadmap to make Amsterdam the first truly circular city, and has a varied membership including Mud Jeans, Black Rock, Philips, TNO, the City of Amsterdam, FairPhone, ABN Bank, Click NL, Schipol Airport, Accenture, and KPMG.WRAPThis UK Charity has launched a new five year plan, 'Resource Revolution, Creating the Future' with a specific section on Clothing and Textiles.Circular Economy AwardsWe even have the first awards programme, sponsored by the Forum of Young Global Leaders in collaboration with Accenture.Concepts and Models for the T&C IndustryThe Circular Economy is essentially a framework model encompassing several pre-existing concepts and approaches which can be, individually, of particular relevance to the T&C sector and to the work of the TCBL Business Labs. (headings below from Wikipedia)Waste is foodHere, the logic is to consider separately the biological and technical components of a product and see how they re-fit into value chains. This applies to reasoning behind fibres, in particular to organic fibres.Diversity is strengthThis in the first instance means that diversity contributes to systemic resilience. More specifically, the emphasis is on longer-lasting products, in particular through the strategy of emotionally durable design. This relates directly to ways to address the Fast Fashion trend, ie through initiatives such as WRAP's Love your Clothes.Industrial EcologyThis approach looks at loop processes within business ecosystems. It's relevant to TCBL in that a) it looks as businesses in a more broader transactional setting that supply chains and b) the approach also focuses on social well being.Cradle to cradleThis emphasis a design approach that advocates "service-life extension of goods – reuse, repair, remanufacture, upgrade technologically" as a strategy for waste prevention, regional job creation and resource efficiency in order to decouple wealth from resource consumption. The vision is sustained by five pillars: nature conservation, limited toxicity, resource productivity, social ecology, and cultural ecology.R&D and related initiatives in the T&C IndustryThere are many on-going research and awareness initiatives currently or recently active, each with a specific relevance to Circular Economy goals and methods and many with the involvement of Euratex.ECAP: European Sustainable Clothing Action Plan (2015-2019)The overall objective of the LIFE ECAP project is to adopt a circular approach to divert over 90 000 tonnes/year of clothing waste from landfill and incineration across Europe by March 2018, and to deliver a more resource efficient clothing sector. ECAP will set targets aiming to scale up these savings by 2020 to over 540 000 tonnes/year (€111 million), and by 2030 to over 700 000 tonnes/year(€144 million).ECWRTI: Electro Coagulation for Water Recycling in Textile Industry (2015-)Textile mills can reduce their water consumption by up to 90 percent using the EColoRO concept, which consists of electrocoagulation followed by membrane filtration, to treat their wastewater without using chemicals and then reuse it.Resyntex: a New Circular Economy Concept for Textiles and Chemicals (2015-)RESYNTEX is a research project which aims to create a new circular economy concept for the textile and chemical industries. Using industrial symbiosis, it aims to produce secondary raw materials from unwearable textile waste.EcoProFabrics: Eco innovation programme (2014-)Exploring the market opportunities for a 100% recyclable polyester fabric, known as Returnity, in a range of workwear, demonstrating a fully circular supply and production chain.SET: Save Energy in Textile SMEs (2014-2016)SET project was launched to deliver real added-value solutions for European textile SMEs. SET will assist at least 150 textile companies in determining the right energy saving measures. Future legal obligations, financial incentives and technologies will also be assessed.SESEC: Sustainable Energy Saving for the European Clothing Industry (2011-2015)Based on industry-driven ideas, the SESEC project facilitates energy efficiency in the European clothing production industry. Coordinated by EURATEX, SESEC developed and offered energy efficiency tools and related training for companies to implement measures considering cost-effectiveness.ARTISAN: Reduction of energy consumption and carbon footprint in the European textile industry (2011-2014)The ARTISAN project envisioned significant reductions (at least 10%) in energy consumption and CO2 emissions of the European Textile Industry by integrating data-capturing technologies, process-based energy measurement and real-time optimization of operations. It provided enterprise management systems with services for monitoring and operational decision making, available at each supply chain partner, and, additionally, trading services for energy and carbon permits forging collaboration across supply networks.Moving the T&C industry towards the Circular EconomyThe Circular Economy will clearly influence the development of the TCBL project, in particular by providing a framework for reaching the goal of a 20% ecological footprint reduction by 2025. TCBL Business Pilots can contribute by building Circular Economy guidelines into their innovation strategies, following the three steps below:Find circularities: businesses can individually map their material and energy flows and identify points for possible circularities, together with the business advantages that can be derived.Design circular: businesses can identify aspects of their product design that can maximise the business benefits of the circular concept.Make contact: moving towards circularity by definition involves connecting with others, be they research institutions proposing new technologies or other industries interested in using by-products. TCBL provides the ideal setting for identifying new partners and building new value chains that are based on circular principles.ReferencesEuropean Parliament (2015): Circular economy: the importance of re-using products and materials, link.
Political economy describes how human societies are organized by exchange. The critical issue for political economists is the interaction between self-directed decision making and the incentives that turn decisions into approved outcomes. In this interaction, political economists see a key role for leadership, a role that depends upon our common concern for others (Robbins, 1981). There are three roles, then, for leadership in the political economist's model: self-directed decision making, incentive making, and establishing the criteria for approved outcomes.
Joseph Fishkin and William Forbath's book-in-progress, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution, offers a radical alternative to the constitutional histories that emerged in the 1990s to defend the New Deal synthesis. Fishkin and Forbath's new constitutional history promises to recast the New Deal as a contingent and incomplete resolution of a centuries-long struggle to achieve the political-economic conditions that the Constitution requires – "requires" in the double sense of "demands" and "depends upon." This struggle is still ongoing and even accelerating, Fishkin and Forbath report, yet it has become increasingly "one-sided." First, the post-WWII economic boom dissipated, taking with it much of the middle class that the New Deal and Great Society legal orders had hoped to create. Then, conservative lawyers and politicians stepped up their attacks on the New Deal and Great Society's remaining achievements, trumpeting a constitutional political economy in which private property free of overweening public management is the pillar of constitutional democracy. Confronted by these dire conditions, legal liberals have forgotten how to fight back, rendered mute by the New Deal synthesis itself, which ironically and erroneously implied that political economy was no longer a matter of constitutional concern. Hoping to even the odds, Fishkin and Forbath offer liberals a grammar of egalitarian constitutional political economy – "the constitution of opportunity" – that was once spoken fluently and effectively by those Americans who argued that the Constitution prohibited oligarchic concentrations of wealth and mandated the political and judicial construction of a broad, inclusive middle class. By placing the discourse of political economy back at the center of constitutional debate, Fishkin and Forbath have – by any fair measure – done more than enough. Yet scholarly innovators tend to find the ranks of their critics swelled by those who have benefited most from their labor. This Essay is no exception to the oedipal rule. It argues that Fishkin and Forbath could go further still in integrating political economy and constitutional history. At times, their detailed analysis of the discourse of "constitutional political economy" comes at the expense of a more fully materialist account of the political-economic conditions and effects of that discourse. Such a discursive emphasis, in turn, risks an overly optimistic assessment of the past virtues and present utility of "the constitution of opportunity," the egalitarian dialect of constitutional political economy that Fishkin and Forbath commend to legal liberals today
Since the early 1990s, constitutional history has experienced a renaissance. This revival had many causes, but three stand out: the Rehnquist Court's attack on formerly sacrosanct features of the "New Deal agenda"; Reagan-Era reassessments of American political development by political scientists, historians, and historical sociologists; and the frustration of constitutional scholars with the inability of legal process theory or political philosophy to produce "authoritative constitutional principles." Spurred by legal crisis and this mix of disciplinary innovation and stagnation, law professors began to tell new stories about our constitutional heritage. They focused on the sources and significance of the New Deal's "constitutional revolution," while also re-examining the constitutionalism of the Founding and Reconstruction in light of New Deal transformations. Given the centrality of the New Deal to this project, constitutional historians seemed to be heading toward a fundamental reconsideration of the relationship between constitutional law and political economy. That is, after all, what New Deal constitutional conflict was all about: the extent to which the Constitution allowed a national political movement to alter the country's economic life in fundamental and lasting ways. And yet, the new generation of constitutional historians generally avoided political economy as such. To be sure, their histories carefully reconstructed early twentieth-century debates about the constitutional authority of the state and federal governments to displace common law economic regulation. But the focus remained on the purely legal logics and purely political events that led the federal judiciary to get out of the business of adjudicating the constitutional merits of various schemes of economic regulation. The economic reasons that political and judicial actors might have had for transforming constitutional democracy received little attention. This exclusion of economic reason from constitutional analysis is symptomatic of what Professors Joseph Fishkin and William Forbath call the "Great Forgetting." From the Founding through the New Deal, Fishkin and Forbath demonstrate, the discourse of "constitutional political economy" was a fundamental feature of American constitutionalism. It was only in the wake of the epochal New Deal synthesis – judicial deference to political regulation of the economy and judicial guardianship of civil liberty and equality – that constitutional political economy became something of a dead language. Prior to that time, constitutional actors across the ideological spectrum spoke in terms of constitutional political economy, believing that "economics and politics [we]re inextricably linked, and [that] a republican constitution require[d] a republican political economy to sustain it, and vice versa." By recovering this language, Fishkin and Forbath's book-in-progress, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution, offers a radical alternative to the constitutional histories that emerged in the 1990s to defend the New Deal synthesis. Fishkin and Forbath's new constitutional history promises to recast the New Deal as a contingent and incomplete resolution of a centuries-long struggle to achieve the political-economic conditions that the Constitution requires – "requires" in the double sense of "demands" and "depends upon." This struggle is still ongoing and even accelerating, Fishkin and Forbath report, yet it has become increasingly "one-sided." First, the post-WWII economic boom dissipated, taking with it much of the middle class that the New Deal and Great Society legal orders had hoped to create. Then, conservative lawyers and politicians stepped up their attacks on the New Deal and Great Society's remaining achievements, trumpeting a constitutional political economy in which private property free of overweening public management is the pillar of constitutional democracy. Confronted by these dire conditions, legal liberals have forgotten how to fight back, rendered mute by the New Deal synthesis itself, which ironically and erroneously implied that political economy was no longer a matter of constitutional concern. Hoping to even the odds, Fishkin and Forbath offer liberals a grammar of egalitarian constitutional political economy – "the constitution of opportunity" – that was once spoken fluently and effectively by those Americans who argued that the Constitution prohibited oligarchic concentrations of wealth and mandated the political and judicial construction of a broad, inclusive middle class.
World practice shows that the share of the digital economy in gross digital product is considered one of the indicators of macroeconomic development of this state. The development of the digital economy is an important, strategic task for Uzbekistan, which determines its competitiveness on a global scale, and provides for the need for our state to create the necessary conditions for the development of this sphere, to stimulate this process.
The Maltese economy is one of the smallest in the world. In 1991, the Maltese GNP was approximately US$25,000 million and the Maltese population was just under 360,000, occupying a land area of around 320 square kilometres. In terms of GNP per capita, however, Malta is not on the low side by international comparisons. Although usually classified as a developing country, its average 1991 per capita GNP, amounted to approximately US$7 ,000, which is higher than most third world countries. The World Bank, in its 1991 World Development Report classified the Maltese economy as an upper middle income one. ; peer-reviewed
"This presentation is adapted from a Harvard KSG workshop held earlier this year on the Political Economy of "Binding Constraints to Growth" Cambodia Pilot for which I served as an External Panelist/Resource Person."
In a call for papers, for the special issue to be devoted to "Urban Economy" late in 2015, that the Economies editors issued recently, I noted the increased attention that has been given to urban economies during the past quarter century. This is concomitant with the increased importance and role in policy that cities have attained. This is, in part, due to the diminished capacity of national and sub-national governments to find the funds needed for urban projects and services, and in part to the understanding that cities are the key to the economies and societies of most if not all nations.[.]
European integration is a fundamentally open-ended and contested process. Within the 'mosaic of European integration theories', critical political economy perspectives highlight the imbalances and structural power asymmetries of the European project, and how they have become manifest in the multiple crises in Europe. How to account for both the origins and consequences of this crisis has become a key question for scholars and students of European integration. We argue that critical political economy (CPE) has an important and unique contribution to make here. Unlike other approaches, CPE seeks to uncover the deep connections between the (internal) dynamics of the European integration process and the dynamics of global capitalism, arguing that European integration, or disintegration for that matter, takes place in a global, structural context that shapes and conditions both form and content of the integration process. In this paper, we provide an overview of the key concepts, methodology and arguments of a critical political economy perspective on European integration. Following a discussion of the core conceptual framework, the paper then proceeds with an integrated analysis of EMU as a political project, with a particular focus on continuity and changes within the political economy of neoliberalism. The Euro crisis here serves as a contemporary reference point to illustrate the strengths and contributions of critical political economy perspectives to the overall mosaic of European integration theories.
