The Unassuming Economist

From a paper by Debkumar Chakrabarti, Sankalpa Bhattacharjee, Pradeepta Sethi:

“This paper undertakes a comprehensive review of some of the less-discussed factors that harbor the potential to explain the wide variations in structural transformation, especially amongst developing economies. We begin by critically reviewing the effects of income, relative price, and international trade, which are generally considered drivers of structural change, with special emphasis on developing economies. Subsequently, we bring to the forefront three comparatively less-discussed factors—income inequality, financial market imperfections, and government policy that can explain a large part of the divergences in the transformation patterns of developing economies. Underscoring the limitation of the conventional discourse that relates cross-country differences in structure in terms of cross-country differences in manufacturing, we emphasize the need for the theoretical discourse to move beyond the industry-centric approach to focus on the recent research that views the surge of services as an additional engine of growth and the possible avenues through which it can affect structural transformation.”

From a paper by Samantha Coccia & Alberto Russo:

“This paper reviews the transmission channels of both conventional and unconventional monetary policy, including income composition, earnings heterogeneity, interest rate exposure, savings redistribution, inflation tax, portfolio composition, and household debt, with a focus on their impact on income and wealth inequality. The survey highlights the crucial role of household heterogeneity in shaping the transmission of monetary policy and its differential effects on income and wealth distribution. These effects operate through several factors, including the primary source of income, employment status, net debtor or net saver positions, differences in portfolio composition, and debt levels. The paper also discusses the shadow banking sector to illustrate the relationship between monetary policy and inequality in a complex financial system. Overall, the paper provides policymakers with a guide to the multifaceted nature of the monetary policy–inequality nexus, given the pervasiveness of household heterogeneity. It also suggests avenues for further research on the combined effects of different transmission channels using macroeconomic models suited to this purpose, such as agent-based models (ABM) with heterogeneous interacting agents.”

From a paper by Edson Roberto Vieira, Andréa Freire de Lucena, Antônio Marcos de Queiroz, Flávia Rezende Campos, and Vitor Pereira Salgado:

“This study aims to analyze the main benefits of Brazils potential accession to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), drawing on the experiences of Chile and Mexico. The Synthetic Control Method (SCM) will be employed, which involves constructing a counterfactual for an economy exposed to an intervention (OECD membership) by replicating the pre-intervention economic behavior of a comparable economy. The results indicate that OECD accession did not generate a significant difference in the economic performance of Chile and Mexico, which may discourage Brazil from adopting measures to pursue OECD membership.”

From a paper by Martin Boďa, Mariana Považanová, and Michaela Tichá:

“For 38 OECD countries during the period 1991–2022, the paper estimates time-varying trajectories of unemployment-based and employment-based Okun coefficients and studies their synchronicity. Schlicht’s VC method is utilized to estimate Okun coefficients and time-series clustering is applied to identify groups of economies with synchronous business cycle characteristics. The findings defy two prevalent beliefs of Okun’s law since many countries display constant or almost constant trajectories of the (un)employment-output sensitivity, and for many countries Okun’s law need not be stronger in a downturn. Furthermore, countries do not synchronize in their business cycle dynamics as shown in disparate trajectories of Okun coefficients, which argues against a single one-size-fits-all stabilization policy, certainly in less homogeneous economic blocks. Finally, there is strong evidence for labour market flows into and outside the labour force that are associated with informal sector size and translated into lesser sensitivity of official labour market variables across the business cycle.”

From a paper by Diego Andrés Cardoso López, Jesús Antonio López Cabrera & Tatiana Isabel
Caly Amador:

“Rural employment is pivotal to achieving the SDGs but remains structurally vulnerable—marked by high informality, seasonality, and climate exposure—which may weaken the canonical growth–unemployment link posited by Okun’s Law. In Latin America, where rural economies rely on climate-sensitive activities, temperature and precipitation shocks can disrupt productivity and labor absorption, calling for a reassessment of Okun’s relationship in rural contexts. This article analyzes the relationship between rural unemployment, real income growth, and climate variability in Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico from 2012 to 2024 using a Panel Vector Autoregression (P-VARX) model. Results indicate that, contrary to Okun’s prediction, real income growth does not always lower rural unemployment. Climate shocks matter: in Brazil, higher temperatures decrease unemployment in short-run; in Colombia, precipitation shocks—with lags—increase unemployment; and in Mexico, temperature shocks lift unemployment on impact before a partial correction. Human capital reduces unemployment only in Colombia. Based on this evidence, we outline four policy directions: (i) mainstream climate adaptation into rural labor policy; (ii) expand inclusive employment programs that tackle informality and low productivity while aligning skills with labor demand; (iii) invest in rural education and targeted skilling for green and youth employment; and (iv) promote territorial, multisectoral local development and job creation with strong institutional support.”