The Unassuming Economist

From a paper by Manjari Johri:

“This paper explores how neoliberal economic policies shaped industrial growth in India, but
also contributed to widening social inequality and environmental degradation. This study
examines how India can balance the economic gains of neoliberal industrialisation with its
mission for environmental preservation and social development. Using the qualitative
approach, the paper has built its argument based on secondary sources like policy documents,
government reports, and corporate CSR disclosures. David Harvey’s insights provide an
understanding of neoliberalism and its impact on democratic principles of society and on the
environment. The research proposes that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), mandated by
India’s Companies Act of 2013, balances the capitalist agenda, maximising the profit share
through its activities in areas like renewable energy, afforestation, and community
development. The paper argues that achieving sustainable development requires rethinking
market priorities by focusing on ethical governance, social inclusion, and ecological
responsibility.”

From the US Department of Energy:

” This report reviews scientific certainties and uncertainties in how anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions have affected, or will affect, the Nation’s climate, extreme weather events, and selected metrics of societal well-being. Those emissions are increasing the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere through a complex and variable carbon cycle, where some portion of the additional CO2 persists in the atmosphere for centuries.

Elevated concentrations of CO2 directly enhance plant growth, globally contributing to “greening” the planet and increasing agricultural productivity [Section 2.1, Chapter 9]. They also make the oceans less alkaline (lower the pH). That is possibly detrimental to coral reefs, although the recent rebound of the Great Barrier Reef suggests otherwise [Section 2.2].

Carbon dioxide also acts as a greenhouse gas, exerting a warming influence on climate and weather [Section 3.1]. Climate change projections require scenarios of future emissions. There is evidence that scenarios widely-used in the impacts literature have overstated observed and likely future emission trends [Section 3.1].

The world’s several dozen global climate models offer little guidance on how much the climate responds to elevated CO2, with the average surface warming under a doubling of the CO2 concentration ranging from 1.8°C to 5.7°C [Section 4.2]. Data-driven methods yield a lower and narrower range [Section 4.3]. Global climate models generally run “hot” in their description of the climate of the past few decades − too much warming at the surface and too much amplification of warming in the lower- and mid-troposphere [Sections 5.2-5.4]. The combination of overly sensitive models and implausible extreme scenarios for future emissions yields exaggerated projections of future warming.

Most extreme weather events in the U.S. do not show long-term trends. Claims of increased frequency or intensity of hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and droughts are not supported by U.S. historical data [Sections 6.1-6.7]. Additionally, forest management practices are often overlooked in assessing changes in wildfire activity [Section 6.8]. Global sea level has risen approximately 8 inches since 1900, but there are significant regional variations driven primarily by local land subsidence; U.S. tide gauge measurements in aggregate show no obvious acceleration in sea level rise beyond the historical average rate [Chapter 7].

Attribution of climate change or extreme weather events to human CO2 emissions is challenged by natural climate variability, data limitations, and inherent model deficiencies [Chapter 8]. Moreover, solar activity’s contribution to the late 20th century warming might be underestimated [Section 8.3.1].

Both models and experience suggest that CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed, and excessively aggressive mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial [Chapters 9, 10, Section 11.1]. Social Cost of Carbon estimates, which attempt to quantify the economic damage of CO2 emissions, are highly sensitive to their underlying assumptions and so provide limited independent information [Section 11.2].

U.S. policy actions are expected to have undetectably small direct impacts on the global climate and any effects will emerge only with long delays [Chapter 12].”

From a chapter by Oliver Fiala and Aristide Kielem:

“The chapter highlights the challenges in assessing the impacts of shocks and crises on child poverty due to the limitations of traditional data sources, proposing the use of alternative data, nowcasting exercises, and simulations when estimating impact in an emergent crisis. The chapter suggests a three-step framework for analysing impacts: conceptualisation, data identification, and simulation. Examples from the global financial crisis in 2008/2009 and the COVID-19 pandemic illustrate how such exercises can help to track the impact of shocks on child poverty.”

From a paper by Justina Joseph Jeyaraj, Shyue Chuan Chong, Mui Yin Chin, Lee Peng Foo:

“Youth unemployment remains a persistent global challenge, clouded by the uncertainties surrounding the expanding digital and gig economies. As governments now turn their attention to regulating the gig economy, the potential impact on youth unemployment is unclear. This study seeks to address this gap by investigating the optimal level of labour regulation that can harness the gig economy’s potential to alleviate youth unemployment, among countries from different geographical locations. Drawing from panel data from 79 countries between 2017 to 2021, the threshold of labour regulation that would mitigate youth unemployment was estimated using the Dynamic Panel Threshold Model (DPTM). The findings reveal that the gig economy’s benefits are maximised when countries achieve a specific threshold of labour regulation—53.5596 on a 100-point scale. This suggests that regulations should not be too stringent, as this can stifle job creation and limit opportunities for youth, leading to higher unemployment. Conversely, overly lenient regulations can lead to exploitation and deteriorating working conditions, which also contribute to unemployment. The policy implications include introducing moderate labour regulations mirroring traditional labour markets, improving cybersecurity and data protection, and creating co-working spaces to reduce social isolation. Additionally, transboundary labour regulations are also essential to safeguard gig workers.”

From a paper by James Galbraith, Ravi Kanbur, Kunal Sen, and Andy Sumner:

“Seven decades ago, Simon Kuznets put forward the hypothesis that as economies developed, national inequality would first increase and then decrease—an inverted U-shape. He provided preliminary evidence for the hypothesis on the basis of the limited data available at the time, and theorized the genesis of the curve as arising from the twin forces of structural transformation of the economy and political economy pressures. Seven decades on, the Kuznets curve still has a hold on the development discourse as new data is used to test the hypothesis, new theories are elaborated to explain the evolution of inequality, and the metaphor of an inverse U-shape is extended beyond its original realm of national inequality. With this rich history and background, the time is right to examine the Kuznets curve literature broadly construed. This overview takes stock of what has been learned and highlights emerging research and policy questions.”