<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org">
<title>Cambridge Journal of Economics - Advance Access</title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org</link>
<description>Cambridge Journal of Economics - RSS feed of articles</description>
<prism:eIssn>1464-3545</prism:eIssn>
<prism:publicationName>Cambridge Journal of Economics</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0309-166X</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep041v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben048v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep020v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep021v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep015v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep017v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep013v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep018v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep016v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep014v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep019v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep012v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep011v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep010v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep009v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep007v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep008v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben060v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep006v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep003v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben046v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep005v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep004v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben063v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben050v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben061v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben062v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben059v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben058v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben057v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben055v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben045v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben044v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben040v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben027v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben033v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben008v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben005v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem049v2?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem046v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem020v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem008v1?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep041v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[On the nature of technologies: knowledge, procedures, artifacts and production inputs]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep041v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In the most general terms, a technology can be seen as a human-constructed means for achieving a particular end, such as the movement of goods and people, the transmission of information or the cure of a disease. These means most often entail <I>procedures</I> regarding how to achieve the ends concerned, particular bits of <I>knowledge</I>, <I>artifacts</I> and of course specific physical <I>inputs</I> necessary to yield the desired outcomes. In fact, the procedures and the underlying knowledge they draw upon, the physical and intangible inputs implicated, and the performance characteristics of outputs are different but complementary aspects of <I>what technology is</I>. These things are the object of this short essay.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dosi, G., Grazzi, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-07-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep041</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[On the nature of technologies: knowledge, procedures, artifacts and production inputs]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben048v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Moral political economy and moral reasoning about rural India: four theoretical schools compared]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben048v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper explores a pluralist approach to moral economy in two ways. First, as a review, four major schools of thought on the rental of land in India are described. I focus on their normative and ontic assumptions. Second, noting that none of these schools is value-neutral, a plurality of six complex moral reasoning strategies emerge from this review. The advantage of the social researcher doing an overview of these normative positions is that we can compare and contrast the meta-criteria that are used. The six moral reasoning strategies are a neoliberal growth strategy, a human capabilities approach, a redistribution approach, a transformative approach, a social equality approach, and a Pareto-optimality approach. The study of these six strategies leads toward the conclusion that more research on complex moral reasoning strategies is called for, because combining them rapidly leads to difficulties. Scientific research can provide evidence to underpin and shape the moral reasoning that takes place in real-world dialogues and debates.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Olsen, W.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-06-25</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben048</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Moral political economy and moral reasoning about rural India: four theoretical schools compared]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-25</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep020v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Uncertainty and money: Keynes, Tobin and Kahn and the disappearance of the precautionary demand for money from liquidity preference theory]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep020v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Keynes answered to critics of the General Theory, in 1937, that they failed to realize that there were two main innovations in that work. The first, was the relationship between money demand and uncertainty; the second was the consumption multiplier. The relation between money demand and uncertainty was in fact the main reason to explain why aggregate demand could fall short of full employment income. However, this was explained by Keynes in 1937 by recourse to a form of precautionary demand for money. In The GT, Keynes had actually merged the precautionary demand into the transactions demand for money, making it very difficult for any reader, friendly or unfriendly, to actually see what he meant in 1937. As a result, Keynes liquidity preference theory of the interest rate in the GT exhibited some important shortcomings that were the subject of many reexaminations, including one by Richard Kahn and another by James Tobin. The paper evaluates Keynes's views, Kahn's and Tobin's solutions to Keynes's dilemmas. At its conclusion it is shown why these themes remain relevant today, particularly when financial systems are in turmoil.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cardim de Carvalho, F. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-06-08</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep020</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Uncertainty and money: Keynes, Tobin and Kahn and the disappearance of the precautionary demand for money from liquidity preference theory]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-08</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep021v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Technology, objects and things in Heidegger]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep021v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Harman, G]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep021</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Technology, objects and things in Heidegger]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-05-29</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep015v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Defending Marshall's 'masterpiece': Ralph Souter's critique of Robbins' Essay]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep015v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>We examine Ralph W. Souter's defence, in the 1930s, of Marshall's <I>Principles</I> against Robbins&rsquo; attempt to recast economics as a &lsquo;purely formal science of implications&rsquo;. Souter elaborated on Marshall's invocations progressively to increase the realism of economic science and contrasted this perspective on Marshall with Robbins&rsquo; atomistic bias, neglect of historical time and irreversibilities, arbitrary restrictions on the scope of economic science and emphasis on logical and mathematical form over content. Souter demonstrates that Robbins takes a Walrasian-inspired perspective on Marshall's equilibrium concept whereas the &lsquo;authentically Marshallian&rsquo; equilibrium notion generally incorporates potential for endogenous change. On this and other matters Souter has doctrinal priority in drawing attention to Marshall's incipient &lsquo;evolutionary economics&rsquo;.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Endres, A. M., Donoghue, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-14</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep015</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Defending Marshall's 'masterpiece': Ralph Souter's critique of Robbins' Essay]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-05-14</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep017v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The impact of business group affiliation on performance: evidence from China's 'national champions']]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep017v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>An important aspect of China's economic reforms has been an ambitious policy to develop 100 or so large, internationally competitive business groups. Very little is known about these national champion groups or the benefits to subsidiary firms of belonging to them. This study, building from insights and methods used in existing literature, examines the performance of subsidiaries affiliated to China's national champion groups. Our results find that they perform comparatively well. We discuss possible reasons for this finding and comment more generally on the important role that business groups now play in China's reform and development.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Guest, P., Sutherland, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-08</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep017</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The impact of business group affiliation on performance: evidence from China's 'national champions']]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-05-08</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep013v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Why do hurdle rates differ from the cost of capital?]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep013v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This article considers the role of hurdle rates in the analysis of investment decisions, analysing a sample of business units from the PIMS (Profit Impact of Marketing Strategy) databank of North American companies, which provides rarely observed data on hurdle rates. Although the standard literature suggests that firms should only invest if the return exceeds the cost of capital, there are several theories that explain the use of investment hurdle rates that differ from discount rates. In fact, our data show that instances where hurdle rates are either above or below the discount rate are common. In a statistical analysis, we find that this behaviour can be explained by a combination of agency theory and real options theory. We take this as important evidence that a full explanation of capital investment cannot be accomplished without a consideration of behavioural and strategic influences on the investment decision.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Driver, C., Temple, P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep013</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Why do hurdle rates differ from the cost of capital?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-05-07</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep018v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[What's special about human technology]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep018v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Human technology is difficult to understand because it is so complex. However, human technology evolved from the simpler technologies of other species. Comparison with these other technologies should illuminate why human technology is distinct. Some birds and primates make tools, or simple technological objects whose function is closely related to their form. Humans, on the other hand, make machines&mdash;relatively complex objects whose functionality derives from the interaction of parts with respect to one another (e.g. a bow and arrow). Making machines requires a cognitive advance called &lsquo;second-order instrumentality&rsquo;, or the ability to invest in the production of an object that only has utility as part of, or for the making of, other objects. This ability enabled human societies to develop specialised forms of organised production, which in turn allowed the stock of artefacts to diversify and accumulate, whereas the technological repertoires of other species remain at a relatively constant level of complexity.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Aunger, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-30</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep018</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[What's special about human technology]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-30</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep016v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Alfred Marshall on big business]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep016v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The purpose of this article is to explore Marshall's perspective on the changes of size and organisation of firms in his time and, more generally, the environment of monopolistic tendencies. It examines the Marshallian evolutionary approach to business organisation as already presented in his <I>Principles of Economics</I> and identifies the quality of this approach as responsible for the keen perceptions made in <I>Industry and Trade</I>, the book in which business organisation and monopolistic tendencies are investigated. The consideration of <I>Industry and Trade</I> includes a comparison that identifies similarities between propositions about big business by Marshall and Alfred Chandler, the author whose work stands as the paradigm for the study of the genesis and development of big business. As an exploration of <I>Industry and Trade</I>, this article contributes to the assessment of a still very little studied book and draws attention to Marshall's method of combining theory and history.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kerstenetzky, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-28</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep016</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Alfred Marshall on big business]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-28</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep014v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Archaeologies of technology]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep014v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Archaeologists make use of several different ontologies to research and develop theories about ancient technology. After briefly sketching out central features of mainstream (materialist) technovisions, this essay concentrates on recent ontological trends emphasizing the &lsquo;mutual becoming&rsquo; of people and products. Symbolic and structuralist orientations enable archaeologists to &lsquo;see&rsquo; something of the social values and cognitive structures shaping technological traditions in the deep past. As the question of gender has become an explicit topic of interest, archaeologists are able, at long last, to theorise about ancient technicians as thinking and feeling women and men. To appreciate ancient technology &lsquo;as if people mattered&rsquo;, I outline my own preferred ontology&mdash;grounded in phenomenology and agency theory. It argues that the ancient technician's body was a mindful, sensual, socially constituted and gendered being making sense of the world&mdash;and themself&mdash;by working through it. <I>Cha&icirc;ne op&eacute;ratoire</I> data on technical gestures and related strategic choices of artifact manufacture, use, and repair provide the necessary empirical <I>and</I> interpretive link between the making of personhood and the making and use of products within the (ancient) body politic.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dobres, M.-A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-28</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep014</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Archaeologies of technology]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-28</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep019v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Engineering and the dual nature of technical artefacts]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep019v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>An analysis of the descriptions of technical artefacts by engineers shows that they use structural and functional concepts in their descriptions. On the basis of this I argue that engineers use a structure-function conception of technical artefacts: technical artefacts are physical structures with functional properties. Taking into account the different nature of structural (physical) and functional properties, I put forward the claim that technical artefacts have a dual nature. This dual nature is interpreted in an epistemological and an ontological sense. In order to explicate the role of human intentions in the ontology of technical artefacts the paper closes with a brief examination of the relation between this dual nature conception of technical artefacts and Thomasson's theory of the metaphysical status of artefact kinds as mind-dependent entities.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kroes, P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-24</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep019</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Engineering and the dual nature of technical artefacts]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-24</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep012v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Works councils and employment growth in German establishments]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep012v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Using data from German manufacturing establishments, this article examines the relationship between works councils and employment growth. Taking the endogeneity of councils into account, the estimates show a positive growth effect of works councils. This suggests that the performance-enhancing voice role of German works councils dominates their monopoly role. Moreover, the findings of this study support the hypothesis that workers are more likely to implement a council to protect their quasi-rents when the establishment is facing a long-term crisis.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jirjahn, U.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-21</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep012</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Works councils and employment growth in German establishments]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-21</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep011v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Little innovation, many jobs: An econometric analysis of the Italian labour productivity crisis]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep011v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Over the past 20 years, Italy has realised changes in labour legislation, leading to a decentralisation of wage bargaining and increased flexibility in labour relations. Both these factors have helped to curb wage growth and to enhance employment growth, but have also led to a crisis in Italian labour productivity growth. Our estimates among 3,000 firms show that firms with a high share of flexible workers, a high labour turnover and lower costs of labour (relative to capital) experienced significantly lower rates of labour productivity growth. Our findings raise doubts about the mainstream call for flexibilisation of European labour markets. We argue that the Italian shift towards a low-productive and labour-intensive growth path is problematic against the background of an ageing population.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lucidi, F., Kleinknecht, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-17</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep011</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Little innovation, many jobs: An econometric analysis of the Italian labour productivity crisis]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-17</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep010v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Public debt sustainability and alternative theories of interest]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep010v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper reappraises sustainable trajectories of public debt and fiscal balance, with particular reference to the possible relations between the interest rate on debt and the growth rate of the economy. From the standpoint of the approach to the theory of interest proposed by Keynes&mdash;and, in a certain sense, also by Sraffa&mdash;the analysis opens up the possibility of sustaining permanent primary budget deficits. However, the extent to which this standpoint enables one to revise the spectrum of feasible empirical magnitudes for sustainable fiscal balances appears rather modest.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Aspromourgos, T., Rees, D., White, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep010</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Public debt sustainability and alternative theories of interest]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-06</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep009v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Accumulation of knowledge and accumulation of capital in early 'theories' of growth and development]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep009v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper argues that prior to Adam Smith economic progress was largely conceived as being based on the accumulation of knowledge. The development by Turgot and Smith of a concept of capital that subsumed other factors contributing to development led their followers to focus on capital to the neglect of the independent role of knowledge. The paper demonstrates that this paradigmatic shift was identified and challenged by Bentham, Hodgskin and Rae who argued for the independent role of innovation but without lasting impact.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Prendergast, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-03-31</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep009</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Accumulation of knowledge and accumulation of capital in early 'theories' of growth and development]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-31</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep007v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Post-Keynesianism without modernity]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep007v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>A robust and critical post-Keynesianism can be specified on the basis of time, uncertainty, and the investigation of the institutions that structure material life, without presupposing what those institutions are. This paper criticises the inclusion in influential presentations of the axiomatic foundation of post-Keynesianism of propositions about government and money that presuppose a <I>particular</I> ensemble of institutions. That ensemble corresponds to the ideal-type called modernity. Without modernity post-Keynesianism gains logical parsimony and breadth of application; the paper discusses non-modernist writers in the tradition that includes J. M. Keynes, K. N. Raj, Celso Furtado and Juan Noyola.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Danby, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-03-18</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep007</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Post-Keynesianism without modernity]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-18</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep008v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Ambiguity and uncertainty in Ellsberg and Shackle]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep008v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper argues that the similarities between Ellsberg's and Shackle's frameworks for discussing the limits of the probabilistic approach to decision theory are more important than usually admitted. The paper discusses the grounds on which the ambiguity surrounding the decision-maker in Ellsberg's urn experiments can be deemed analogous to the uncertainty faced by Shackle's entrepreneur taking &lsquo;crucial decisions&rsquo;. The two authors&rsquo; insights are assessed, and special attention is paid to the criteria for decision under uncertainty they put forward. The paper establishes a link between Ellsberg's and Shackle's perspectives and the non-additive probability approach of Gilboa and Schmeidler, an approach that offers an alternative to standard probability calculus, which can be of use to analyse both ambiguity and uncertainty. The comparison between Ellsberg and Shackle draws on an interpretation of Keynes's <I>Treatise on Probability</I> emphasising Keynes's rejection of both well-defined probability functions and maximisation as a guide to human conduct. It is shown that Keynes's viewpoint implies a reconsideration of the boundaries of probability theory that is in the same vein of Ellsberg's and Shackle's concern in the years of the consolidation of Savage's new probabilistic mainstream.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Basili, M., Zappia, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-03-12</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep008</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Ambiguity and uncertainty in Ellsberg and Shackle]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-12</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben060v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Structural change and the BOP-constraint: why did Latin America fail to converge?]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben060v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper discusses why Latin America failed to achieve sustainable convergence with the developed world since 1960 and analyses different phases of convergence and divergence using a structuralist-Keynesian approach. First, it is argued that there are critical differences between Latin America, the developed economies and the Asian economies as regards the evolution of the income elasticity of the demand for imports (), the rate of growth of exports and the balance-of-payments-constrained rate of growth. The income elasticity of the demand for imports in Latin America showed an upward trend, particularly after the mid-1970s, which was not matched by a similar increase in exports&mdash;a pattern in sharp contrast with that of the East Asian countries. The evolution of  and exports are used to set forth a typology of Latin American economic growth since 1960. In addition, the paper relates elasticities and the less favourable Latin American performance to the intensity and direction of structural change. Using a broad sample of developed and developing economies, it is shown that the developing countries that succeed in reducing the income gap are those that transformed their economic structures in favour of sectors with higher Schumpeterian and Keynesian efficiency.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cimoli, M., Porcile, G., Rovira, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-03-05</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben060</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Structural change and the BOP-constraint: why did Latin America fail to converge?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-05</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep006v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Marxism and the critique of social rationality: from surplus value to the politics of technology]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep006v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The most effective way to silence criticism is a justification on the very terms of the likely critique. When an action is rationally justified, how can reason deny its legitimacy? This paper concerns critical strategies that have been employed for addressing the resistance of rationality to rational critique, particularly with respect to technology. Foucault addressed this problem in his theory of power/knowledge. This paper explores Marx's anticipation of that approach in his critique of the &lsquo;social rationality&rsquo; of the market and technology. Marx got around the silencing effect of social rationality with something very much like the concept of underdetermination in his discussion of the length of the working day. There are hints of a critique of technology in his writings as well. In the 1960s and 1970s, neo-Marxists and post-structuralists demanded radical changes in the technological rationality of advanced societies. Soon technical controversies spread, primarily through the influence of the environmental movement. The concept of underdetermination was finally formulated clearly in contemporary science and technology studies, but without explicit political purpose. Nevertheless, this revision of the academic understanding of technology contributes to weakening technocratic rationales for public policy. A new era of technical politics has begun.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Feenberg, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-03-04</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep006</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Marxism and the critique of social rationality: from surplus value to the politics of technology]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-04</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep003v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Private contributions to collective concerns: modelling donor behaviour]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep003v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The obvious discrepancy between the predictions of the standard model of private provision of public goods and empirical indications have led many economists to search for alternative explanations of the phenomenon of voluntary contributions. Whilst concentrating on models of donor motivation, the present paper gives a non-technical survey of a sample of these approaches, and discusses their advantages and limitations.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[von Kotzebue, A., Wigger, B. U.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-03-04</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep003</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Private contributions to collective concerns: modelling donor behaviour]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-04</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben046v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Poverty, time and vagueness: integrating the core poverty and chronic poverty frameworks]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben046v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In recent decades there have been considerable steps forward in terms of understanding poverty. This paper identifies three &lsquo;meta-dimensions&rsquo; of poverty, which relate to: (i) depth and severity; (ii) breadth and multidimensionality; and (iii) time and duration. The advances that have been made in terms of conceptualising, measuring and analysing poverty in each of these areas are briefly considered. It is shown that the third and final &lsquo;meta-dimension&rsquo;&mdash;time and duration&mdash;has been neglected until relatively recently. It is argued that time, and, in particular, duration is an important analytical component for understanding the experience of poverty and the processes that create and reduce poverty. The final part of the paper suggests a way of integrating time into a unified framework for understanding poverty, which can deal with the depth, breadth and duration of poverty. This involves extending Mozaffar Qizilbash's poverty and vagueness methodology to include duration.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Clark, D., Hulme, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-03-03</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben046</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Poverty, time and vagueness: integrating the core poverty and chronic poverty frameworks]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-03-03</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep005v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Input price-input quantity relations and the numeraire]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep005v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The fact that a competitive agent faces &lsquo;given&rsquo; input prices does not necessarily mean that these prices can be completely arbitrary, especially in the long run. An obvious case, but not the only one, is when there are input&ndash;output relations among industries. But as soon as long-run input price interrelatedness is taken seriously, the very conception of a downward sloping input demand curve encounters serious difficulties. Although one can always draw an input price&ndash;input quantity relation, its main qualitative property&mdash;the sign of its slope&mdash;is not generally independent of the arbitrary choice of num&eacute;raire.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Opocher, A., Steedman, I.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-25</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep005</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Input price-input quantity relations and the numeraire]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-25</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep004v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The revealed preferences of high technology acquirers: An analysis of the innovation characteristics of their targets]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bep004v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper investigates whether acquisitions involving public high technology firms are best understood in terms of acquirers taking over firms with &lsquo;superior&rsquo; innovation performance to access their assets, or acquiring firms with &lsquo;inferior&rsquo; innovation performance to turn them around. Innovation performance is proxied by R&amp;D-intensity (R&amp;D expenditure over assets), patent-intensity (patents per US$million of assets), i.e. the R&amp;D productivity of a firm's assets, and the patent stock, i.e. the accumulated R&amp;D output. We find substantial overlaps between target and non-acquired firm characteristics. Nevertheless targets have a relatively high R&amp;D-intensity and a large patent stock, which is consistent with acquirers targeting firms with a superior innovation performance. However, these targets have significantly lower pre-acquisition patent-intensity and hence a lower R&amp;D productivity. The targets are also experiencing weak financial performance. Our results are consistent with a selection process in which acquirers seek out firms that have a superior past innovation performance, but that are failing in terms of recent R&amp;D productivity and financial performance. A comparison of the performance of the targets with their acquirers reinforces this conclusion.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Desyllas, P., Hughes, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-25</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bep004</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The revealed preferences of high technology acquirers: An analysis of the innovation characteristics of their targets]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-25</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben063v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Innovation, structural change and productivity growth: evidence from Italian regions, 1980-2003]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben063v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper develops a Schumpeterian approach to structural change, by grafting the role of business cycles and creative destruction into the growth retardation theory. The context of the empirical analysis is represented by the growth path of 20 Italian regions over the period 1981&ndash;2003, in the light of the transition towards the knowledge-based economy. The results strongly support our hypotheses: (i) early-industrialised areas are fully involved in the generalised movement towards the knowledge-based economy; (ii) due to the delayed expansion of manufacturing activities in late-industrialised areas, productivity growth and innovation takes place within manufacturing sectors.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quatraro, F.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-01-28</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben063</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Innovation, structural change and productivity growth: evidence from Italian regions, 1980-2003]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-28</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben050v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[A Sraffian critique of the classical notion of centre of gravitation]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben050v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In this paper we use insights from Sraffa's classic, <I>Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities</I>, to argue that the classical notion of &lsquo;centre of gravitation&rsquo; is not a sound concept. The market mechanics of labour allocation through price signals and quantity adjustments, given effectual demands, do not lead to a &lsquo;centre of gravitation&rsquo;. We work out all such possible market mechanisms, including the specific classical case, and show that the &lsquo;centre of gravitation&rsquo; is a non-attractive point in all cases.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dupertuis, M.-S., Sinha, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-01-21</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben050</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A Sraffian critique of the classical notion of centre of gravitation]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-21</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben061v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Socio-economic evolution and Darwinism in Thorstein Veblen: a critical appraisal]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben061v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The paper questions the idea that a biology-based perspective, and more specifically Darwinian population thinking, constitutes a real alternative for the study of the evolution of social systems. This is done through a critical appraisal of the work of Thorstein Veblen. Even though Veblen's account of the evolution of humankind makes the notion of natural selection practically redundant, his remaining attachment to Darwinism created two other serious tensions for him. First, his attachment to the Darwinian scheme of &lsquo;descent with modification&rsquo; kept him from devising a systematic theory of the different socio-economic systems he studied. This shortcoming is more evident in his analysis of capitalism, which not only lacks an elaborated theory but also contradicts his initial evolutionary programme. Second, by postulating that human history is a question of cultural change, Veblen was tempted to conflate social structures, institutions and habits of thought.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Liagouras, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-01-18</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben061</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Socio-economic evolution and Darwinism in Thorstein Veblen: a critical appraisal]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-18</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben062v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Clarence Ayres, technology, pragmatism and progress]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben062v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper explores the origins and continued relevance of Clarence Ayres&rsquo; definition of technology as a process involving both physical tools and a scientific method of reasoning, where science is understood to achieve cross-cultural explanatory power by virtue of technological validation. Ayres&rsquo; concept of technology derived from his training as a Pragmatist and was primarily philosophical rather than descriptive, but is congruent with the work of modern historians of technology and remains useful in addressing a variety of concerns about both the promise and dangers of technological change.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mayhew, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-01-15</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben062</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Clarence Ayres, technology, pragmatism and progress]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-15</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben059v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Aggregate demand and the endogeneity of the natural rate of growth: evidence from Latin American economies]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben059v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This paper aims to explore the Keynesian idea that aggregate demand matters for economic activity, both in the short and long run. To that extent, it discusses the endogeneity of the natural rate of growth, and presents two empirical exercises: the first one tests for unit roots in output for 12 Latin American countries using panel data. The results suggest that gross domestic product series are non-stationary and therefore shocks (both from supply and demand) have persistent effects in the economy. The second exercise tests the hypothesis of an endogenous natural rate of growth, and suggests that potential output has been influenced by the actual level of economic activity in Latin American countries. This result corroborates the hypothesis that aggregate demand has long-run effects in the economy.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Libanio, G. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-01-08</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben059</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Aggregate demand and the endogeneity of the natural rate of growth: evidence from Latin American economies]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-08</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben058v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Economics as social engineering? Questioning the performativity thesis]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben058v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The social engineering ambitions of economics have never been so high. Economists are increasingly invited to construct markets from scratch or to design mechanisms that mimic the market. Science students take these social engineering efforts as evidence for the capacity of economists to make the economy more like its description in economic theories. This paper scrutinises one such viewpoint. It examines Michel Callon's performativity thesis that presents the stronger stance regarding the impact of economics on the economy&mdash;economic theory can be made true by construction. It concludes that the research carried out thus far fails to support this thesis. It has shown that economics, understood in a very loose sense, has an active role in market building.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Santos, A. C., Rodrigues, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-01-08</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben058</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Economics as social engineering? Questioning the performativity thesis]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-08</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben057v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Feminist theories of technology]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben057v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Feminist theories of technology have come a long way over the last quarter of a century. The expanding engagement at the intersection of feminist scholarship and science and technology studies (STS) has enriched both fields immeasurably, and I will largely focus my reflections on the literature associated with these sites. I begin by highlighting the continuities as well as the differences between contemporary and earlier feminist debates on technology. Current approaches focus on the mutual shaping of gender and technology, in which technology is conceptualised as both a source and consequence of gender relations. In avoiding both technological determinism and gender essentialism, such theories emphasise that the gender-technology relationship is fluid and situated. These deliberations highlight how processes of technical change can influence gender power relations. A feminist politics of technology is thus key to achieving gender equality.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wajcman, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-01-08</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben057</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Feminist theories of technology]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-08</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben055v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Reality and technology]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben055v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Is it possible to have a wide and deep theory of technology? Commodification provides a helpful clue. It refers to the width of the economy and suggests incisive criticism. Although it is economically precise, its moral and cultural force needs explication. In that sense it refers to the detachment of a thing or practice from its context of engagement with a time, a place, and a community. Engagement is replaced by a technological machinery. The conjunction of commodity and machinery sheds light on consumption and labour and on the discontents of life in an advanced industrial society. It also suggests a disjunctive view of the future&mdash;still more commodification or a recovery of engagement.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Borgmann, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben055</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Reality and technology]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-16</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben045v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Aggregate capital productivity in the US economy, 1964-2001]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben045v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In the decomposition of the US macroeconomic pre-tax rate of profit as the product of profit share and capital productivity, this paper considers the role of capital productivity over the period 1964&ndash;2001. The primary finding is that prior to 1982 capital productivity fell because capital deepening proceeded faster than labour productivity growth, whereas from 1982 to 1997 the opposite occured. If, prior to 1982, the US economy was characterised by Marx-biased technical progress, what requires explanation is why labour productivity continued to grow after 1982 in the absence of sufficient capital deepening. The paper explores various hypotheses, contrasts neoclassical and classical notions of technical change, and investigates the robustness of its results to the productive&ndash;unproductive distinction and to accounting for changes in capacity utilisation.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mohun, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-10</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben045</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Aggregate capital productivity in the US economy, 1964-2001]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben044v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The labour market in a Keynesian economic regime: theoretical debate and empirical findings]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben044v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In a Keynesian mode of thinking wages become the nominal anchor for the price level because unit-labour costs in a closed economy represent the most important factor in determining the price level. The second most important driver of price level changes is the exchange rate. A positive economic regime includes nominal wage increases according to trend productivity growth as well as the target inflation rate of the central bank, discretionary monetary policy geared towards growth and anti-cyclical fiscal policy. Since the early 1990s nominal wages in the USA and the UK have followed this wage norm to a large extent. But in Germany, wages have increased below this norm or even decreased, and in Japan this effect has been even more extreme. Overall, while Japan and Germany have suffered from dysfunctional economic regimes leading to low growth, the UK and USA have managed a much more positive interaction between wage development, monetary policy and fiscal policy.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Herr, H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben044</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The labour market in a Keynesian economic regime: theoretical debate and empirical findings]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben040v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Limited liability, shareholder rights and the problem of corporate irresponsibility]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben040v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>There has long been a tendency to see the corporate legal form as presently constituted as economically determined, as the more or less inevitable product of the demands of advanced technology and economic efficiency. Through an examination of its historical emergence, focusing in particular on the introduction of general limited liability and the development of the modern doctrine of separate corporate personality, this paper takes issue with this view, arguing that the corporate legal form was, and is, in large part a political construct developed to accommodate and protect the <I>rentier</I> investor. It is, moreover, a construct which institutionalises irresponsibility. Against this backdrop different ways of trying to resolve the problem of corporate irresponsibility are explored. The key, the paper suggests, is to be found in decoupling the privilege of limited liability from rights of control.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ireland, P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-11-28</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben040</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Limited liability, shareholder rights and the problem of corporate irresponsibility]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-11-28</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben027v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Social analysis and the capabilities approach: a limit to Martha Nussbaum's universalist ethics]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben027v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Postcolonial theorists critique modernist universalisms for legitimating structural power. Responding to these critiques, Martha Nussbaum argues that abandoning universalism leads to ethical relativism. Adapting Amartya Sen's capabilities approach, she has proposed a modified universalism that draws on cross-cultural conversations as a non-ethnocentric basis for universal judgment and intervention. This paper takes as its point of departure Nussbaum's (mis)reading of a critique by Nkiru Nzegwu. Working from that conversational failure, the paper identifies the social analysis Nussbaum deploys as a point of ethnocentric breakdown in her universalist approach.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charusheela, S]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-09-08</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben027</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Social analysis and the capabilities approach: a limit to Martha Nussbaum's universalist ethics]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-08</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben033v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Post-Keynesianism meets feminist economics]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben033v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This article explores the relationships between post-Keynesian economics and feminist economics. It distinguishes three key concepts in each tradition that recommend serious attention in the other tradition: gender, the household and unpaid work and caring as key concepts in feminist economics; uncertainty, market power and endogenous dynamics as core concepts in post-Keynesian economics. This article will show, with reference to the literature in which such cross-fertilisation has been explored already, how both traditions can be enriched from a stronger mutual engagement.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[van Staveren, I.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-22</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben033</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Post-Keynesianism meets feminist economics]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-08-22</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben008v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Global order and the new economic policy in India: the (post)colonial formation of the small-scale sector]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben008v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Using a class focused Marxist approach, we elucidate the adopted position of Indian small-scale sector as a devalued other within the adopted development paradigm that accords primacy to Capital and West. In the background of this understanding of small-scale sector, we demonstrate how the New Economic Policy in the era of globalization could be theorized as a tool to obtain the (post) colonial hegemony of capital over the small-scale sector.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chakrabarti, A., Chaudhury, A., Cullenberg, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-04-17</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben008</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Global order and the new economic policy in India: the (post)colonial formation of the small-scale sector]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-04-17</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben005v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Ambivalence of class subjectivity: the sharecroppers of the post-bellum southern USA]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/ben005v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The paper argues that the economic literature on sharecropping uses a modernist notion of subjectivity that fails to explain the complexity of economic behaviour or the social context in which agency is formed. I look at the case of economic subjectivity of southern sharecropping tenants in the post-bellum USA, using non-determinist Marxist class analysis together with the concept of subjectivity drawing from postcolonial theory, in particular the work of Homi Bhabha. I argue that this alternative approach to economic subjectivity, which posits an ambivalent, or contradictory subjectivity provides us with a better analytical grasp of economic agency and a better explanation of the perpetuation or demise of a productive form such as sharecropping.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kayatekin, S. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-03-18</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/ben005</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Ambivalence of class subjectivity: the sharecroppers of the post-bellum southern USA]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-18</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem049v2?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Gender and the stability of consumption: a feminist contribution to post-Keynesian economics]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem049v2?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Alan Coddington critiques post-Keynesians for their use of fundamental uncertainty. He argues that fundamental uncertainty should also affect the consumption function, undermining the case for Keynesian macroeconomic policies. This paper shows how contemporary feminist theory provides post-Keynesians with a compelling response to Coddington. It uses the concept of gender as an <I>effect of heteronormativity</I> to integrate &lsquo;the household&rsquo;, the institution that undertakes consumption spending, into post-Keynesian economics. This gives us a more robust analysis of the sources of consumption stability in a world marked by the fundamental unknowability of the future.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charusheela, S]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-27</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bem049</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Gender and the stability of consumption: a feminist contribution to post-Keynesian economics]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-02-27</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem046v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Feminist and post-Keynesian economics: challenges and opportunities]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem046v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>There are significant areas of difference between feminist and post-Keynesian economics. Some feminist contributions to discussions about ontology and critical realism suggest strong reluctance to adopt realist philosophies and these provide a marked contrast with post-Keynesians' frequent appeals for economics to reflect &lsquo;reality&rsquo;. At the same time, however, some post-Keynesians are calling for a more inclusive, pluralist approach to economic research, a discussion that has areas of commonality with various feminist discussions of epistemology. Continued productive dialogue between the two traditions may be facilitated through an understanding of their contrasting ontological and epistemological debates. It may be further accommodated by growing recognition of the potential advantages of utilising plural methods to address specific research questions.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Austen, S., Jefferson, T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-23</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bem046</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Feminist and post-Keynesian economics: challenges and opportunities]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-11-23</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem020v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Moral sentiments and economic practices in Kyrgyzstan: the internal embeddedness of a moral economy]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem020v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>In <I>The Theory of Moral Sentiments</I>, Adam Smith notes that moral sentiments, emotions and feelings affect economic and social practices. In the literature on social embeddedness of the economy, sentiments and emotions are neglected, and more attention is given to rules, norms and institutions, which are seen as being instrumental in reducing transaction costs and creating social cohesion. By examining the transformation of Kyrgyzstan to a market economy, the authors show how emotions can motivate individuals to pursue ultimate concerns and commitments. Furthermore, it is argued that without moral emotions and institutional safeguards, economic practices and relationships can be distorted.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sanghera, B., Satybaldieva, E.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-09-17</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bem020</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Moral sentiments and economic practices in Kyrgyzstan: the internal embeddedness of a moral economy]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-09-17</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem008v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Market institutions, trust and norms: exploring moral economies in Nigerian food systems]]></title>
<link>http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/bem008v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Informal market institutions and small-scale traders are responsible for feeding Nigerian cities. This study analyses a range of economic relationships and institutions that have evolved in the context of inadequate formal institutions such as banks and legal contracts. Through examining both personal relationships and institutional based trust, the paper explores the role of moral norms. Trust is shown to be related to sanctions, information on other parties and a range of norms that are drawn on both calculatively and habitually. The perceived moralities of different forms of institution (such as credit systems, trader associations and commission agents) are also examined.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lyon, F., Porter, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-06-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/cje/bem008</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Market institutions, trust and norms: exploring moral economies in Nigerian food systems]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Cambridge Political Economy Society</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>