A Planetary Economic System: Green Valuta, Regrowth, and the Multiple Loop Economy Synthesis (2022)

IART  Ingrid Katrine Amundsen /

A Planetary Economic System: Green Valuta, Regrowth, and the Multiple Loop Economy Synthesis 

The Redistributive, Rearrangement, Reorganizational, and the Theoretically Tabula Rasa Alternative to Capitalism (2022)


By Ingrid Katrine Amundsen


 



KEYWORDS: GLOBAL/LOCAL COLLABORATION • A GLOBAL REDISTRIBUTION SYSTEM • ALTERNATIVE TO CAPITALISM


A Collaborative take on Regrowth, Planetary Economic Activities, Natural Ecosystems, and the Global/Local Economic Society. 

Work in progress...


PRELUDE


"Although competition means that resources are allocated in an efficient and rational way, this does not necessarily mean that the distribution is fair. [...]. When the market economy, both nationally and globally, contributes to the ever-increasing differences, with the consequence that some live in abundance while others starve, it shows that liberalism's demands for equality and justice are not met. [...]. [The economy should assure that] human welfare, efficient use of resources and adaptation to ecological frameworks [are encountered]. [...]. Since a pure market economy has not built in any principles, that ensure that resources are distributed in a fair way, the consequence of the differential treatment is instead that the distance between rich and poor increases in a self-reinforcing way. [...]. The solution may lie within an economic paradigm based on a foundation that unites humanism with ecological responsibility" (translated from Norwegian by the author, Jacobsen 2019, p. 70 and 73).



ABSTRACT

Towards a Planetary Economic System


What is an economy if it fails to support the majority of humanity and nature? Indeed, after a crisis, such as a historical shock, which being in a pandemic state certainly is: "the rules of the game changes" according to Krugman (2020c). The corona crisis, creates vast opportunities to rethink our economic system. We must ask ourselves: what works, and what does not? It is time for a fundamental transfiguration of the economic system, from a dysfunctional economic system; with lacks in adaptiveness and redistribution deficiency, to a system that is more redistributive and collaborative, resilient, and adaptive on all geographical scales (Hylland Eriksen 2019). It has to make humanity and nature, recover, thrive and rise again, and secure a more geographically evenly dispearsion of advanced technologies, and resources. It must emphasise on technological fairness, at the expense of technological power abuse, monopoly, and exploitation. Additionally, it must accentuate on a healthy economic and political power balance globally, hence it must also address pressing geopolitical matters, and urgent global issues tied to natural ecosystem resources. We must base our global economy on renewable energy and renewable resources, in order to create a sustainable economy for the future. Moreover, the uncertain times we are all in, creates an opening for the objective outsider's perspective of reinventing and reimagining economic theories, and notions – a tabula rasa situation. This, with all the objectiveness and preconseptions, and biases, embodied in the understanding, that follows such an self-proclaimed position, and given the situation our global society is in: it is time to change the rules for the better, and create alternative and holistic economic principles, for our common future. We must not let this historical shock change our planet, our world, for the worse. Furthermore, we must shape a sustainable economic system, within the framewoorks of a social-ecological economic leadership and a socio-technical system, which can take on the challenges, that our global economy is currently facing such as: economic instability, heightened job insecurity, social and economic inequality, the gap between financial assets and the real economy, fragmentation of the global economic system due to a lack of adaptive governance and collective leadership, and a need for a more just and fair redistribution of resources, inequal provisions of environmental burdens and problems, as well as the uneven spread of advanced technologies, and increased national debts, and household debts (Chang 2010c, e, Dicken 2011b, Schultz, Folke, Österblom, and Olsson 2015, Piketty 2017, Krugman 2020a, b, Rajan 2020). The problems are piling up! It is important to note that the alternative system that will be stated, is not an all-inclusive answer to all these societal problems. The author has had to make her internal trade-offs, based on a careful selection of literature, which may highlight the most pressing and relevant and urgent challenges, and critiques of our current economic system. More importantly, the author have chosen to adress what the majority of people, and nature need the most. Such needs are social and economic equality, a more equal access to advanced technologies, and a global-local leadership that ensures that requirements of global redistribution, and ecological measures are met. Ecological bondaries and human limits must not be exceeded. And additionally, we must adress what the oponents of capitalism are up against too. Because, the economic language is also the language of power (Moene 2020). As complex and demanding the suggested solutions to these economic system failures are, we have to confront these acute societal and environmental challenges now. These problems will only get worse, if we do not pull the problems by the root instantly: we are up against the wall! 




INTRODUCTION

A Game Changer for Humanity and Nature in a the Structural Perspective


To start with, in order to approach these problematic trends apparent, we must replace capitalisms perpetual growth mechanisms, with a more dynamic alternation between different growth types. Likewise, rather than the linear capitalist system, the author will create a multiple loop system, that may tie these growth types together. The loops can be summarized by these key functions: first, it is embedded in social-economic, socio-technical and ecological-physical systems, which serves as three levels in the visual models, that will be stated. Second, it alternates between different types of growth: growth, negative and positive regrowth, and degrowth, in multiple loop systems, suggested as the core theoretical concept of the circular economy (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2012). Third, the author make claims for a local-global economic and adaptive governance system, which means that the adaptive governance must have a presence on all geographical scales. More importantly, theories on adaptive governance, is rooted within the frameworks of social-ecological economic systems, such as e.g. the ecological economy (Schultz et al 2015, Spash and Asara 2018, Jacobsen 2019a-e). Additionally, this part of the alternative economic system is embedded in institutional economics (Ostrom 2015, Hodgeson 2018), and behavioural economics, as well as complexity economics (Kahneman 2011, Kirman 2018). Both of these; latter mentioned economic systems, discuss the notions such as bounded rationality, and the economy as an open system (Kirman 2018). This, in contrast to hardcore free market capitalism, that is embedded in rational decision making in closed economic systems, which; the classical economists argue, are calculable, since they are claimed to appear in closed systems (Kirman 2018). This will be further adressed in the theoretical section on the two mentioned economics: behavioral economics and complexity economics. Fourth and most importantly, the alternative is rooted in theories on the optimum currency area (Mundell 1961), and theories on the impossible trinity by Fleming and Mundell (1962, 1963), to shape a redistributive green valuta currency system. However, this poses an obvious challenge: what is the right balance between national sovereignty, and more regional and optimum currency areas? The most straightforward solution is to make these two geographical levels of economic power interdependent. This will be stressed in the theoretical section and the analysis, and it is perhaps the most demanding make-or-break point of this brief alternative synthesis. Furthermore, the alternative economic synthesis is heterodox, pluralist and eclectic, these notions will be scrutinized and explained in the methodological section. Fifth, embedded in circularity and different growth types, the alternative must have a grip on the environmental, social and economic challenges of a responsible consumption and production system (UNDP in Guterres 2020). These are concerns and opportunities, that free-market capitalism fails to handle safely, and adapt to. Sixth, the five privious steps must work as an planetary and economic adaptive governance system, that connects all levels (local-global), and makes them interact socially and societally, politically and technologically, environmentally, as well as economically. This comprehensive system alternative, therefore, has to co-work, co-create and co-evolve with and within the environment, and its physical surroundings. In other words, this system perspective on global economic activities, must function as a redistributive and sustainable economic system alternative to capitalism. Additionally, this alternative must have profound respect for the vulnerabilities and limits of natural ecosystems and physical surroundings as commons (Meadows, Meadows, Randers, and Beherens 1972, Ostrom 2015). Because, over consumption and production, creates irresponsible environmental vulnerabilities and problems, that puts humanity and nature at high risk.


A global economy must strive to find solutions on how to prevent "the distance between rich and poor [to increase] in a self-reinforcing way" (Jacobsen 2019c, p. 73). This situation is inherited by the liberal economists' sins of not addressing their own shortcomings, when it comes to accepting that nature has given limits. They should have created preventive, and impactful principles, that are more than mere rational, and efficient market supply and demand distribution and competition, which has proven to be unfair and unjust in the long run (Jacobsen 2019c, p. 70). More importantly, future global principles must, therefore, be ecological, humanist, and economic, in the sense that these must provide a fair and just redistribution of resources among mankind, that does not diminish nature's path (Jacobsen 2019c, p. 73). In this context, we thereby, have to ask ourselves two more simple, but highly relevant questions. If we put our minds into it: how can we make our global economic system; an economy for the majority of people, and nature? Is it doable? It is time to get into this powerful game! It is time for a game changer for humanity, and nature! Let us, if only momentarily, try to distract our attention from the pile of problems in front of us. We must not become paralyzed by the amounts of difficulties we are confronted with. We briefly have to ignore the profound feeling of being stuck in a system failure. And then quickly turn our curiosity to the cascade of benefits and opportunities for nature and humanity, embedded in an alternative and well-funtioning planetary economic system. The alternative suggessted should, most of all, strive to be fit for a sustainable future: our common future (UN 1987)! To achieve this, we must seeize the opportunity, that have been handed over to us, and exploit the tabula rasa situation we are in, to reimagine and reinvent the economic system we live by, in order to create a better global future for all!


But, what if everything, as we know it, falls apart?



METHODOLOGY

If Everything Falls Apart: What if the Capitalist System Should Collapse?


The most fundamental methodological choice of strategy must be to create a well-functioning alternative to the capitalist system, in case of emergency, or if everything should fall apart. If our global economy fails to co-work, co-create, and co-evolve with nature on a global-local level. If it fails to support a fairer redistribution of advanced technologies. If the economic system fails to stabilize ifself. And, if it fails to provide us a more equal social and economic alternative: it will leave us; the majority, if not futureless, but certainly less prosperous, and with a more restricted livelihood and freedoms, than the fortunate few. This is why we need to make the most out of the crisis or historical shock we are in, to change the principles of the game, that we reluctantly have had to play by, up until this point. We must put our trust in problem solving mindsets, and believe that there are multiple economic system combination possibilities, that has not yet transpired to us. These might be far better suited to approach our urgent societal matters, such as social and economic, institutional and political, as well as technological, and environmental challenges, concerns, and hopes for the future. We are not stuck forever! Given this, the core question that comes to my mind is: why not switch to a more preferable "game", with better future prospects for humanity, and nature? Our current free market capitalist system, has proven to us that it is surely not as sustainable or resilient, responsible or adaptive, stable or equal, redistributive or collaborative, as we would have anticipated. And, which we legitimately can demand from a well-functioning global economic system, in the future. To elaborate on this, wether we like it or not, we have to pave the way for system changes of our dysfunctional capitalist model. Because, our current economic system suppress, or ceases to support natural ecosystems, and the majority of mankind. We have pushed ourselves; our natural ecosystems, our physical surroundings, and humanity, to the limits. Because, there are human and planetary limits to growth, which we have surpassed (Meadows et al 1972). This, measured by e.g. increased job insecurity, rapid internationalization of finance, and increased ecological footprints, which makes human beings live in economic uncertainty, as well as to live in an economic unstable system (Meadows et al 1972, Dicken 2011a). There are limits to our efficiency. And additionally, we have had to live in an economic system, in which economic growth, caused by increasement in e.g. population, food production, industrialization, pollution, and consumption of nonrenewable natural resources, exceeds ecological bondaries globally (Meadows et al 1972). Our core aim must therefore be to create a stabilized world, in which nature's given limits are not exceeded (Meadows et al 1972). In other words: we have to construct an innovative contract with nature, in which each country commit to constitutionally protect nature. They must ensure that nature's ecological bondaries are not surpassed, and that their environmental laws are not violated. These national environmental laws, must be set by legally binding legislation for the protection of the environment internationally, in which each country's national sovereignty is also taken into account. An international agreement to protect nature, must therefore, strike the right balance between interdependence and independence, integration and national sovereignty, solidarity and freedom, competition and cooperation. This, must be achieved through an adaptive governance globally, which ensures that the political, economic, social, and legislative negotiation, between the global, regional, national, and local scale; on matters of the environment, functions optimally. More importantly, we need an alternative to capitalism; in case of a collapse, or more likely: in case of a continuous system failure to support humanity and nature, in a lifesaving manner. 




The Tabula Rasa Perspective on Planetary Economics and Structural Change


That said, it is time to find an environmental cure to our societal problems, that must be embedded in a structural change, and a radical change of our global society, by the means of a planetary, redistributive, and collaborative economic model. This economic model must put regrowth, and a green valuta first. It must also transform the economy from being linear to resource generating loop systems. In order to support this new world order: the post-corona order, with new power configurations, new options to collaborate, new planetary perspectives, and new geopolitical alliances, we must change our global, national, regional, and local economic societies radically. This century, the 21st century, is a milestone historically. We are in a groundbreaking shock. This represents a vast and powerful opportunity, to change the inequal and unfair economic system we have constructed, and over exploitation of nature. This economic system favours the few, rather than the majority of people. We need to start rearranging and redistributing the resources we possess more fairly, and equally socially and economically. To acheive that, we additionaly need to start rethinking the organization or the arrangement of our global economic society. And, start this transition towards sustainability, by evaluating tabula rasa options to the arrangement of our economic system, in which we decide what to keep, and what to throw away. At least: We must make a real effort in trying to leed the economy into more sustainable patterns. These sustainable patterns must supports the majority of mankind, advanced technological fairness, and nature jointly. We must enable nature and humanity to co-work, co-create and co-evolve, socially, technologically, and ecologically. It is time to open up for a real conversation and a dialogue with nature. The corona crisis might make most of us to rethink our lives and exsistence, as well as urgent existential matters of our global society. We have already become more prone to adapt to changes. We must accept that we are in a favourable tabula rasa moment! The 21st century could be the year of fundamantal, and rapid changes, with global repercussions! The world is turning and tossing, and changing as I write! The structures are changing, we must seize the opportunity, and allows it to change us too! But, remember, it must, most certainly, be the other way around: we create the structures, we are the structures, only we can change them! We must breake free from pre-existing chains of problems, and start reinventing and reimagening what kind of societal principles we need: what the earth needs, is what we need too! It is time to clean the table, and take in all the impression from economic theories and notions, in order to reimagine and reinvent these. Let us start from an emty and blank state. The tabula rasa moment is on: let the changes roll!



A Synthesis and a Bird's-Eye Persepective: the Pluralist, Heterodox, Complementary, and Eclectic Way of Adressing Urgent Societal Problems


"Economics is a hugely varied field, with an amazing colourful array of different paradigms, methods and focuses, and pluralist economics is [a study] that includes all of these [,...by] introduc[ing] critical and dissenting ideas" (Fischer, Hasell, Proctor, Uwakwe, Ward-Perkins and Watson 2018, p. 2 and 4).



Navigating into the Unknown: The Insider-Outsider Paradox in Qualitative Research


"The qualitative researcher's perspective is perhaps a paradoxical one: it is to be acutely tuned-in to the experiences and meaning systems of others—to indwell—and at the same time to be aware of how one's own biases and preconceptions may be influencing what one is trying to understand" (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994, p. 123; in Corbin Dwyer and Buckle 2009).




THEORY

Challenges for a Planetary Economic System: What Are We Up Against?


Social, Political, and Economic Inequality, in the Age of Hardcore Economics: the Rise of a Global Liberal Democracy




The Need for Global Leadership and the Planetary Collaboration: Adaptive Governance, Socio-technical Systems, the Commons, and Durkheim's Collective Consciousness



The Art of Addressing the Geographical Uneveness of Advanced Technologies




The Limits to Growth and the Planatary Bondaries: Towards Responsible Consumption and Production




Our Natural Ecosystems Soaked in Problems: Earth I Know Your Face



Scrutinizing the Carry Pillars for an Economic Alternative to Capitalism:

A Careful Selection of Pre-existing Alternative Theories, and Notions


Different Strands Within the Ecological Economy



Adaptive Governance, Institutional Economics, and the Commons



The Similarities and Differences of Kahneman's Behavioural Economy, and Complexity Economics



A Safety Valve for Consumption and Production: the Promise of Circularity



The Concept of Optimum Currency Area (OCA), and the Impossible Trinity (IT)



EMPIRIE

Is the European Union (EU) an Optimum Currency Area (OCA)?




DISCUSSION 

Planetary Economics: Three Social and Societal Spheres and Four Different Geographical scales


The Alternation Between Different Growth Types


Forcasting: the Alternative to Capitalism Visualized, based on a Green Valuta, and a Green Ratification System of Green Points Stated




CONCLUSION

On the Alternative to Capitalism and its Obstacles


Why Can the Alternative Created Work as a Well-functioning Economic System for the World?




Why Can Free-Market Capitalism Destroy the World?




EPILOGUE

A Time To Reflect on the Past and Learn


What is Gained, and What is Lost? Do We Need an Alternative to Capitalism?



POSTLUDE




REFERENCES


Aizenman, J. (2010). The Impossible Trinity (aka The Policy Trilemma). Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz: Department of Economics, p. 11. [online]. Available at:

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9k29n6qn [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Baldwin, Richard (2006). In or Out: Does it Matter? An Evidence-Based Analysis of the Euro's Trade Effects. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research. [online]. Available at:

https://books.google.no/books?id=WLMSX2Jk7S4C&redir_esc=y [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Baldwin, R., and Wyplosz, C. (2004). The Economics of European Integration. New York: McGraw Hill.


Beck, H., and Prinz, A. (2012). The Trilemma of a Monetary Union: Another Impossible Trinity. Intereconomics Review of European Economic Policy, Volume 47, Number 1, pp. 39-43.


Boughton, J.M. (2003). On the Origins of the Fleming-Mundell Model. [pdf]. Available at:

https://www.imf.org/External/Pubs/FT/staffp/2003/01/PDF/Bough.pdf [Accessed: 07.30.2020.].

IMF Staff Papers. 50 (1), pp. 1–3. 


Burda, M.C., and Wyplosz, C. (2005). Macroeconomics: A European Text, 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 246–248, 515, 516. [online]. Available at:

https://archive.org/details/macroeconomicseu0004burd/page/246/mode/2up [Accessed: 07.30.2020].


Caporaso, J.A, Min–hyung, K., Durrett, W.N., and Wesley, R.B. (2015). Still a Regulatory State? The European Union and the financial crisis. Journal of European Public Policy. 22 (7), pp. 889–907.


Chang, H-J. (2010a). Big Government Makes People More Open to Change. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. London: Penguin Books, pp. 221-231.


Chang, H-J. (2010b). Conclusion: How to Rebuild the World Economy. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. London: Penguin Books, pp. 252-265.


Chang, H-J. (2010c). Financial Markets Needs to Become Less, Not More, Efficient. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. London: Penguin Books, pp. 231-242.


Chang, H-J. (2010d). Good Economic Policy Does Not Require Good Economists. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. London: Penguin Books, pp. 242-252.


Chang, H-J. (2010e). Greater Macroeconomic Stability has Not Made the World Economy more Stable. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. London: Penguin Books, pp. 51-62.


Chang, H-J. (2010f). The US Does Not Have the Highest Living Standard in the World. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. London: Penguin Books, pp. 102-112.


Chang, H-J. (2010g). We Are Not Smart Enough to Leave Things to the Market. 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism. London: Penguin Books, pp. 168-178.


Chang, H.-J. (2014). Economics: The User's Guide. New York: Bloomsbury Press, pp. 1-384.


Christakis, N.A., and Fowler, J.H. (2009). In the Thick of It. Connected – The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. New York, Boston and London: Little, Brown and Company, pp. 3-32.


Costa Rica Law (2020). Costa Rica Environmental Laws. [online]. Available at:

https://costaricalaw.com/costa-rica-legal-topics/environmental-law/costa-rica-environmental-laws/ [Accessed: 08.13.2020].


Dicken, P. (2011a). 'Making the World go Round' Advanced Business Services – Especially Finance. Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy. London: Sage Publications Ltd, pp. 367–399.


Dicken, P. (2011b). Technological Change: 'Gales of Creative Destruction'. Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy. London: Sage Publications Ltd, pp. 75-109.


Durkheim, E. (1893). The Division of Labour in Society. Trans. W. D. Halls, intro. Lewis A. Coser. New York: Free Press, 1997, pp. 1.343.


Dwyer, Corbin, S. and Buckle, J.L. (2009). The Space Between: On Being an Insider-Outsider in Qualitative Research. Alberta:

International Journal of Qualitative Methods. [online]. Available at:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/160940690900800105 [Accessed: 08.10.2020].


Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2012). From Linear to Circular. Towards the Circular Economy: an Economic and Business Rationale for an Accelerated Transition, pp. 24-34.


Feenstra, R.C., and Taylor, A.M. (2014). International Macroeconomics. New York: Worth, pp. 412-14.


Fischer, L., Hasell, J.,  Proctor, Uwakwe, D., Ward-Perkins, Z., and Watson, C. (2018). Introduction. Rethinking Economics. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 1-5.


Fishwick, A., Georgiou, C., Huston, K., and Marechal, A. (2010). Impossible Trinity. 30-Seconds Economics. Brighton: Ivy Press Limited, pp. 98-100.


Fishwick, A., Georgiou, C., Huston, K., and Marechal, A. (2010). Optimum Currency Area. 30-Seconds Economics. Brighton: Ivy Press Limited, pp. 96-98.


Fishwick, A., Georgiou, C., Huston, K., and Marechal, A. (2010). The Tragedy of the Common. 30-Seconds Economics. Brighton: Ivy Press Limited, pp. 142-144.


Fleming, J.M. (1962). Domestic Financial Policies under Fixed and Floating Exchange Rates. IMF Staff Papers. 9, pp. 369–379.


Frankel, J.A. and Rose, A.K. (1997). The Endogenity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria. The Economic Journal. 108 (449), pp. 1009–1025. [pdf]. Available at:

http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/arose/ocaej.pdf [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Friedman, M. (2002). Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: The Univeristy of Chicago Press, pp. 1-208. 


Gallagher, K. (2010). Capital Controls Back in IMF Toolkit. London: The Guardian. [online]. Available at:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/mar/01/imf-capital-controls [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Garnaut, R. (1999). Southeast Asia's Economic Crisis: Origins, Lessons, and the Way Forward. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. [online]. Available at:

https://books.google.no/books?id=uIqNc7WZVB0C&pg=PA93&redir_esc=y&hl=no#v=onepage&q&f=false [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Goodhart, C.A.E. (1998). The Two Concepts of Money: Implications for the Analysis of Optimal Currency Areas. European Journal of Political Economy. 14 (3), pp. 407–432.


Guterres, A. (2020). Goal 12: Responsible Consumption and Production. [twitter]. New York: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).


Harford, T. (2012). The Undercover Economist. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-293.


Higgins, P. (2010). Eradicating Ecocide – Exposing the Corporate and Political Practices Destroying the Planet and Proposing the Laws Needed to Eradicate Ecocide. ??


Higgins, P. (2012). Earth is Our Business – Changing the Rules of the Game. ??


Hodgeson, G.M. (2018). Institutional Economics. Rethinking Economics. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 45-60.


Hylland Eriksen, T. (2019). The Promise of Radical Interdisciplinarity. [online]. Available at: https://evolution-institute.org/commentary/the-promise-of-radical-interdisciplinarity/ [Accessed: 03.25.2019].


Jacobsen, Ove (2019a). Transformasjon. Økologisk Økonomi. Oslo: Flux Forlag, pp. 261-293.


Jacobsen, Ove (2019b). Økonomi og Miljøansvar. Økologisk Økonomi. Oslo: Flux Forlag, pp. 39-58.


Jacobsen, Ove (2019c). Økonomi og Samfunnsansvar. Økologisk Økonomi. Oslo: Flux Forlag, pp. 58-74.


Jacobsen, Ove (2019d). Økonomisk System. Økologisk Økonomi. Oslo: Flux Forlag, pp. 179-205.


Jacobsen, Ove (2019e). Økologisk Økonomi. Oslo: Flux Forlag at Kulturhuset.


Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. London: Penguin Books, pp. 1-499.


Kennedy, M. (1987). Interest and Inflation Free Money. ??


Kennedy, M. (2012). Occupy Money. ??


Keynes, J.M. (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan, pp. 161-162.


Kirman, A. (2018). Complexity Economics. Rethinking Economics. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 91-107. 


Kouparitsas, M.A. (2001). Is the United States an Optimum Currency Area? An Empirical Analysis of Regional Business Cycles. Chicago: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Working Paper. [pdf]. Available at:

file:///C:/Users/76iar/AppData/Local/Packages/Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe/TempState/Downloads/wp2001-22-pdf%20(1).pdf [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Krugman, P. (2018). Economics. New York: Worth Publishers Inc.,U.S., pp. 1-1168.


Krugman, P. (2020a). Inequality: Our Divided Society. [online]. Available at:

https://www.masterclass.com/classes/paul-krugman-teaches-economics-and-society/chapters/inequality-our-divided-society [Accessed: 07.30.2020]. 


Krugman, P. (2020b). Inequality: The Growing Gap. [online]. Available at:

https://www.masterclass.com/classes/paul-krugman-teaches-economics-and-society/chapters/inequality-the-growing-gap [Accessed: 07.30.2020].


Krugman, P. (2010). Myths of Austerity. New York: New York Times. [online]. Available at:

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/02/opinion/02krugman.html [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Krugman, P. (2015). The Euroskeptic Vindication (blog). Retrieved 24 July 2015.


Krugman, P. (2020c). Understanding Macroeconomics: The Fed and the IS-LM (Wonkish). [online]. Available at:

https://www.masterclass.com/classes/paul-krugman-teaches-economics-and-society/chapters/understanding-macroeconomics-the-fed-and-is-lm-wonkish [Accesses: 05.22.2020].


Levitt, S.D., and Dubner, S.J. (2005). Freakeconomics. London: Penguin Books, pp. 1-315.


van Marrewijk, C., Ottens, D., and Schueller, S. (2006). International Economics: Theory, Application, and Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 620.


McKinnon, R. I. (1988). Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies for International Financial Stability: A Proposal. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2 (1), pp. 83–103.


Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J., and Behrens, W.W. (1972). Limits to Growth. Potomac: Potomac Associates - Universe Books, pp. 1-205.


Ministry for the Environment (2020). New Zealand's Environmental Legislation, Resource Management Act 1991. [online]. Available at:

https://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/state-new-zealand’s-environment-1997-chapter-four-environment-4 [Accessed: 08.13.2020].


Moene, K.O. (2020). Hvordan vil Samfunnet se ut på andre siden av Koronakrisen? Interview with Economist Moene at Torp. Oslo: Norsk Rikskringkastning (NRK). [online]. Oslo: University of Oslo, Depertment of Economics. Available at:

https://www.sv.uio.no/econ/om/aktuelt/i-media/2020/2020-05-13-moene.html [Accessed: 05.19.2020].


Mundell, R. A. (1961). A Theory of Optimum Currency Areas. American Economic Review. 51 (4), pp. 657-665.


Mundell, R.A. (1963). Capital Mobility and Stabilization Policy under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates. Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science. 29 (4), pp. 475–485. 


Mundell, R.A. (2012). Euro is Here to Stay. Toronto: Financial Post. [online]. Available at:

https://financialpost.com/opinion/robert-mundell-euro-is-here-to-stay [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


New York Times (2010). Greece Takes Bailout, but Doubts for Region Persist. New York: New York Times. [online]. Available at:

https://www.nytimes.com/section/business/dealbook [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Nordbakken, L.P. (2017). Liberale Tenkere for Vår Tid. Oslo: Civita, pp. 1-223.


O’Rourke, K. (2013). Cross of Euros. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 27 (3), pp. 167–192.


Ostrom, E. (2015a). Analyzing Institutional Change. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 103-143.


Ostrom, E. (2015b). Analyzing Institutional Failures and Fragilities. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 143-182.


Ostrom, E. (2015c). Reflecting on the Commons. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-29.


Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp 1-355.


Ostrom, E. and Crawford, S.E.S. (1995). A Grammar of Institutions. American Political Science Review 89(3), pp. 582–600.


Ostrom, E. and Walker, J. (red) (2003). Trust and Reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons for Experimental Research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 1-423.


Obstfeld, M., Shambaugh, J.C., and Taylor, A.M. (2005). The Trilemma in History: Tradeoffs Among Exchange Rates, Monetary Policies, and Capital Mobility. [pdf]. Available at:

https://www.dnb.nl/binaries/sr094_tcm46-146871.pdf [Accessed: 07.30.2020]. Review of Economics and Statistics. 87 (3), pp. 423–438.


Obstfeld, M., Taylor, A.M. (1998). The Great Depression as a Watershed: International Capital Mobility in the Long Run. In Bordo, M. D., Goldin, C., and White, E.N. (eds.). The Defining Moment: The Great Depression and the American Economy in the Twentieth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 353–402.


Patnaik, I., and Shah, A. (2010). Asia Confronts the Impossible Trinity. New Delhi: National Institute of Public Finance and Policy

Working Paper 2010-64. [pdf]. Available at:

https://www.nipfp.org.in/media/medialibrary/2013/04/wp_2010_64.pdf [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Piketty, T. (2020). Capital and Ideology. ???


Piketty, T. (2017). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, pp. 1-793.


Piketty, T. (2015). The Economics of Inquality. ???


Rajan, R. (2020). Raghuram Rajan - Governor of India's Reserve Bank. London: BBC, BBC World News: HARDtalk. [online]. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000jqlv [Accessed: 05.29.2020].


Ricci, L.A. (2008). A Model of an Optimum Currency Area. Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment e-Journal. 2 (8), pp. 1–31. [online]. Available at:

http://www.economics-ejournal.org/economics/journalarticles/2008-8 [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Rigby, D., & Essletzbitchler, J. (2010). Generalized Darwinism and Evolutionary Economic Geography, in (eds.) Martin, R., & Boschma, R. (2010). The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, pp. 43-61.


Rodrik, D. (2010). The End of an Era in Finance. Project Syndicate. [online]. Available at:

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-end-of-an-era-in-finance?barrier=accesspaylog [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


Rodrik, D. (2007). The Inescapable Trilemma of the World Economy. [online]. Available at:

https://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2007/06/the-inescapable.html [Accessed: 07.30.2020].


Schultz, L. Folke, C. Österblom, H. and Olsson, P. (2015). Adaptive Governance, Ecosystem Management, and Natural Capital. Washington, DC: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United states of America (PNAS). [online]. Available at:

https://www.pnas.org/content/112/24/7369#:~:text=Adaptive%20governance%20refers%20to%20flexible,across%20landscapes%20and%20seascapes%20(6 [Accessed: 06.12.2020].


Scitovsky, T. (1984). Lerner's Contribution to Economics. Journal of Economic Literature. 22 (4), pp. 1547–1571.


Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1-1146.


Spash, C.L., and Asara, V. (2018). Ecological Economics. Rethinking Economics. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 120-133.


Subramanian, A.d (2009). Time For Coordinated Capital Account Controls?. The Baseline Scenario. [online]. Available at:

https://baselinescenario.com/2009/11/18/time-for-coordinated-capital-account-controls/ [Accessed: 07.31.2020].


United Nations (UN) (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. [pdf]. Available at:

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf [Accessed: 06.11.2020].


Vrnáková, I. and Bartušková, H. (2013). Is Euro Area an Optimal Currency Area and What Barriers Could Obstruct Its Future Development?. ACTA VSFS, University of Finance and Administration, vol. 7(2), pp. 123-144.


Wheelan, C. (2002). Naked Economics: Undressing the Dismal Science. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, pp. 1-354.


Young, S. (2018). Behavioural Economics. Rethinking Economics. London and New York: Rooutledge, pp. 76-91.


Yun, J. (2019). Interdependent Capitalism: Redesigning the Social Contract through Inclusive Stakeholding. ???


Copyright ©. All Rights Reserved. IART Ingrid Katrine Amundsen.