Views: 114
At the end of October, two distinguished scientists, Professors Leonardo Becchetti and Jeffrey Sachs published a “call” for a “new economics” based on research, teaching and practice. The idea aims to assist “humanity facing many deep challenges”. The future cohort of economists is going to create “humane, just, peaceful, productive and sustainable” economic systems. However, numerous vital political factors should be included in their project, as well…
Looking at the three components of “the call”, our Institute would like to comment on all of them, i.e. on teaching, research and practice. Our comments aimed to underline that the modern challenges “facing humanity” are not only of an economic nature; the initiators might know that nature and biodiversity are suffering as well.
Besides, as is well known, that almost all decision-making and governance at national and international levels are based on a combination of basic political, economic and social factors. That is leading to recognizing a slightly different approach involving political economy’s content.
Teaching and education for “new economics”
The authors’ “new economics” is aimed at creating a new educational and teaching “discipline”, which is built on six pillars:
– holistic and interdisciplinary approach;
– a “global discipline” reflecting historical, cultural, geographical and biophysical diversity of an interconnected world;
– a discipline grounded in human nature, replacing the dangerous simplifications of homo economicus with the realities of human beings as “zoon politikon” (social animals);
– a discipline that recognizes the fundamental role of collective action at all levels from the local to the global;
– a discipline that “aims for the common human good”, and
– a discipline that promotes a global ethical dialogue and understanding drawing upon ethical traditions and cultures around the world.
However, the contemporary “burden” on education providers dealing with modern challenges have been more complicated then it perceived initially. As soon as the education providers are already dealing with the complex issues of teaching “global challenges”, there are some references to important information sources:
= Educational Challenges for a New Century: Policies for sustainable growth. – SpringerBriefs in Education Series (2024). -126 pp. Source: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-59013-9; ISBN 978-3-031-59012-2.
= More on new global trends in “teaching sustainability” in:
https://www.integrin.dk/2024/08/26/global-higher-education-sustainability-initiative/
Research
Probably it is the most vital part of the whole “project”, as all of its parts need a though research, specifically the “practice”.
The initiators are right: first, the modern teaching of economics is based on “merging classical economics and the new Keynesian economics”; the authors acknowledge, it includes “three core precepts”: a) the psychology of homo economicus; b) the primacy of markets in allocating resources; c) “the narrow role of the state to correct market failures”, stabilize the macro-economy and ensure an adequate basic distribution of income. As to the latter, modern national governance has already adopted several legal and executive measures aimed to “correct market failures”; the fact that adds positive arguments to advances in political economy.
While recognizing the “conceptual limitations” the authors suggest that the researchers shall “search for new approaches”: the latter included: e.g. “behavioral and institutional economics”, coped with the “civil economics” with “a much richer appreciation of the interaction of politics, society and economy”; this interaction has already led to the “economic renaissance movement” in Italy. No doubt, this is a vital recognition of the “triple approach” to political economy “uniting” environmental, social and governance criteria (the so-called ESG approach). It has to be mentioned that environmental, social and governance aspects in national political economy (i.e. the ESGs) have already gained importance in politics, economics and business. Although the ESG-triangle follows most urgent global challenges (sustainability, climate mitigation, digitalisation, etc.), the concept goes beyond “purely” environmental connotation: i.e. the emphasis is placed on social and politico-governance issues. The ESG-approach to modern political economy is based on such vital presumptions as: a) environmental component “coordinates” the ways the corporate entities and numerous companies safeguard human environment; b) social criteria examines how companies and states are managing the relationships with employees, suppliers, customers and communities; and c) governance measures are aimed at available public/private instruments in regulating evolving basics in national political economy, including the role of political leadership, executive abilities, legislation, as well as audits, internal controls and shareholder rights.
More in: https://www.integrin.dk/2024/08/16/triple-approach-to-modern-political-economy-new-patterns-through-esg/
On “political capitalism” in Italy see: https://www.integrin.dk/2024/08/28/the-sings-of-political-capitalism-in-europe-italian-initiatives/
Second, globalisation: the issue needs particular academic’s attention due to: a) multi-polar global governance and politics, b) world-wide SDGs implementation, c) new cutting-edge digital technologies, including AI, advanced biotechnology and geo-engineering, to name a few, d) the trend towards “new global ethics” would help the global community to prevent “perpetual war and the real risk of nuclear Armageddon”, as the authors acknowledged.
On examples of European actions to boost bio-technology and bio-manufacturing in: https://www.integrin.dk/2024/05/15/biotechnology-and-biomanufacturing-in-the-eu-perspective-strategy/ .
Additionally on European “economic governance” in: https://www.integrin.dk/2024/10/26/new-european-economic-governance-facing-the-future/
The third research point, as soon as the “call” is aimed at global community of economists, is oriented towards “economic renaissance” and based on the following research items: = holistic and interdisciplinary approach, = fundamental role of collective action at all levels from the local to the global; = new global economic ethics (in cultivation progressive personal values/ virtues, ethical business practices and governing systems to promote the common good). It is well worth mentioning the European approaches to “renaissance”, though along the industrial lines.
More on the EU’s approaches in: https://www.integrin.dk/2022/01/06/modern-european-industrial-policy-through-challenges-and-reforms/
As to practice, this part of the “call” seems to be the weakest point in the whole “project”. As the authors noted in the conclusion that the outcomes of the “call” would be “a long journey that will gain traction and relevance in the course of new research, textbooks, and courses that prove their worth as contributors to global problem solving and human wellbeing. The new economics will be co-created in conferences, debates, and policy proposals throughout the world”, added the authors. And they added: “it rests on the shoulders of “by students and today’s economists”; yet the practical steps are quite deeming.
Note. All references and citations from the SDSN news in: https://www.unsdsn.org/news/a-call-for-a-new-economics-for-our-time/?utm_source=SDSN&utm_campaign=8ff67450e0-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_10_15_08_16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-8ff67450e0-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&mc_cid=8ff67450e0&mc_eid=f8beb14f5d