Abstract
This article outlines some of the limitations of existing institutions
and their inadequacy in bringing about 'green transformations' to address
climate change in order to explain the need for alternative approaches to
institutions. It outlines the 'entrepreneurial state' approach, as outlined by
Mariana Mazzucato as a promising conceptual approach with potentially
transformative policy implications to address the issues of innovation. It
identifies some of the political challenges to achieving entrepreneurial
state-type institutions in contexts where configurations of power
and existing actor networks are unfavourable. It argues that although
entrepreneurial state-type institutions are often framed as operating by
harnessing high degrees of cooperation between different actors according
to commonly-held long-term objectives, achieving the right types of
institutions is likely to require a high degree of contestation in order to
overcome existing vested interests. Moreover, it discusses the relationship
between green transformations and democratic participation.
Keywords: entrepreneurial state, green transformations, renewable
energy, climate change, elite capture, path dependency.
The Institute of Development Studies (IDS) 50th Anniversary
Conference drew attention to the inadequacy of the world's institutions
and conceptual approaches towards institutions in addressing pressing
global challenges. In part this is due to changes in the world economy.
Whilst conventional development studies programmes have tended
to view challenges in developing countries as existing either in a
separate sphere, requiring a specific type of expertise and knowledge,
or alternatively as representing an ideal set of institutions to which
developing countries should aspire, there is increasing agreement that
these demarcations are outdated (Schmitz and Scoones 2015). The rise
of some middle-income countries, and in particular the middle classes
within those countries, has led to a degree of convergence in incomes
between those groups enjoying greater income in developing countries
and those in the middle and lower-middle classes of the developed world who have seen their incomes stagnate (Milanovic 2016). Second,
it has become increasingly clear that, far from representing an ideal set
of institutions to which developing countries should aspire, developed
country institutions frequently exhibit the same types of flaws
commonly associated with developing countries. Third, the challenges
posed by phenomena such as inequality and climate change, which
fundamentally threaten human wellbeing, require serious institutional
responses, and are unlikely to be resolved by institutions which are
based on inadequate and unrealistic conceptual frameworks.
In this article, I briefly outline some of the limitations of existing
institutions and their inadequacy in bringing about 'green
transformations' to address climate change in order to explain the need
for alternative approaches to institutions. Subsequently, I outline the
'entrepreneurial state' approach, as outlined by Mariana Mazzucato
(2013) as a superior conceptual approach with more realistic and at
the same time transformative policy implications to address the issues
of innovation. I identify some of the political challenges to achieving
entrepreneurial state-type institutions in contexts where configurations
of power and existing actor networks are unfavourable, comparing the
experiences of renewable energy policy in Germany and the UK to
illustrate the influence of path dependency and contextual factors on
policymaking processes and subsequently on the long-term impacts of
policies. I argue that although entrepreneurial state-type institutions are
often framed as operating by harnessing high degrees of cooperation
between different actors according to commonly-held long-term
objectives, achieving the right types of institutions is likely to require
a high degree of contestation in order to overcome existing vested
interests. Moreover, I highlight that there are only limited lessons which
can be drawn from past examples of heterodox approaches to bring
about economic transformations, and discuss the relationship between
green transformations and democratic participation.
1 The dysfunctionality of existing institutions
The 2008 financial crash and its aftermath, characterised by austerity
programmes pushing the cost of the crisis onto the majority of the
population, has drawn attention to the dysfunctionality of developed
country institutions. Existing institutions in developed countries have
allowed for massive concentrations of wealth at the top end of wealth
distribution, and the parallel dominance of financial elites and their
ideas in other key sectors of society such as the media and politics.
Elite capture is reflected most clearly in legislation which systematically
favours capital over labour, thus institutionalising the accentuation and
perpetuation of inequality in law (Hsu 2014). As Stiglitz and Greenwald
(2014) argue, economic orthodoxy has not been a positive development
in terms of technological or institutional innovation, as companies
have massive incentives to focus on gaining and protecting market and
political power rather than engaging in the riskier and more uncertain
challenge of long-term innovation. Far from creating the conditions
for long-term investment, they have encouraged firms to prioritise rent-seeking and the maximisation of shareholder value, with companies
increasingly investing more and more in buying back their own shares
and less in long-term investment (Lazonick 2014; Haldane 2016).
Catastrophically, this has all happened at the precise moment in history
when the world faces the unprecedented challenge of decarbonising
economic growth and human development. Greenhouse gas emissions
are so heavily embedded within current paradigms of economic
growth that nothing less than a fundamental transformation of policies,
technology, institutions and modes of innovation is necessary if human
wellbeing is to be secured without breaching the 'safe operating space'
imposed by environmental limits (Leach et al. 2012; Zenghelis 2016).
Achieving the target of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by
50 per cent below 1990 levels by 2050 requires bringing about a 'green
transformation', defined as 'the process of restructuring that brings
the economy within the planetary boundaries' (Schmitz 2015). Unlike
historical energy transformations, green transformations will have to be
driven explicitly by environmental concerns as opposed to profit motives
or increased consumer benefits (Newell 2015). Such transformations will
depend to a large degree on the capacity of societies to direct processes of
technological innovation towards advances which prioritise sustainability.
2 Innovation, the 'entrepreneurial state' and climate change
Awareness of the inadequacies of conventional economic and
institutional approaches to addressing climate change has led to
a reassessment of how processes of innovation and institutional
development have actually functioned in practice. Central in this
reassessment is the work of Mariana Mazzucato (2013, 2016), who has
challenged conventional narratives of how technological innovation has
occurred in practice, arguing that virtually all substantial technological
advances in modern history have owed themselves to state support
and collaboration between public and private sectors rather than the
competition and entrepreneurialism of self-interested actors. Central
to this account is the understanding that markets are institutions which
are outcomes of interactions between different public and private
actors and institutions rather than pre-existing 'natural' institutions,
and are embedded in wider institutional structures (Mazzucato 2016;
Polanyi 1944 [2001]). Moreover, technological innovation is not the
result of 'exogenous' technological opportunities, but rather of active
government policy. Key examples of the 'entrepreneurial state' in
practice include the railroads, the Internet, modern-day pharmaceutical
companies and nanotechnology, all of which 'trace their most
courageous, early and capital intensive "entrepreneurial" investments
back to the state' (Mazzucato 2013). This narrative therefore gives the
state a far greater prominence in influencing not only the rate but also
the direction of innovation, allowing it to shape markets in favour of
innovations which are likely to promote equality and environmental
sustainability (Atkinson 2015; Mazzucato 2016). According to
Mazzucato, the direction is influenced by 'mission-oriented' public
policies and institutions, which establish their objectives and contribute their own resources in order to fundamentally tilt the direction of
innovation in favour of publicly chosen goals.
3 Political challenges
The question the entrepreneurial state approach raises is precisely how
the political conditions to allow for this are to be created. The intellectual
argument for an alternative paradigm might be strong, but is likely to
require disruption to come to fruition, because dominant narratives have
a tendency to maintain power through particular framings of problems,
forms of knowledge, organisational arrangements and bureaucratic
routines, all of which tend towards the perpetuation of certain pathways
and the marginalisation of others (Leach, Scoones and Stirling 2010).
Moreover, there are clear limitations in using historical examples of
entrepreneurial states to shape future green transformations.
The historical examples provided by Mazzucato are contingent on
particular historical contexts, economic and social conditions and
coalitions of interests which are not likely to be replicated. For example,
the post-war conditions that facilitated the rise of a social democratic
consensus in much of the Western world were facilitated by a
combination of a section of the industrial capitalist class seeing benefits
in bolstering the purchasing power of the majority of the population,
the destruction of manufacturing capacity during the war allowing for
massive increases in expansion, and the fear of communism. In the
current context in the UK, for example, it is not entirely clear who
would be the potential partners in the creation of institutions who
could act in the way Mazzucato envisages. Moreover, public institutions
can be 'mission-oriented' in perverse ways, for example when they are
directed towards supporting the development of fracking, or the arms
trade (Mazzucato 2016). In many developed countries, political capture
of the key institutions on which any alternative project would depend is
extensive, ranging from the mainstream media to political parties and
supposedly neutral public institutions such as tax collection authorities
and regulators (Stiglitz 2012; Fuentes-Neiva and Galasso 2014). Such
interest groups are capable of forming powerful networks which
have strong vested interests in the promotion of problematic types of
solutions to climate change, such as emissions trading, which has been
criticised for avoiding any structural transformation of energy systems.
In spite of its manifest problems, emissions trading has achieved a
prominent place in attempts to address climate change thanks largely to
an alliance of large investors, professional accountants and consultants,
and key sectors of the aid industry (Schmitz and Scoones 2015).
Therefore, while there are unquestionably potential private sector allies
for a progressive political project aiming to promote decarbonisation
(Newell and Paterson 2011), forming a viable and transformative
alliance with them may require contestatory processes because the actor
networks in favour of the status quo are often extremely well positioned
and organised within structures of power. Moreover, new political
subjects need to be empowered to drive any serious process in order to counter the inevitably conservative nature of the nation state, captured
as it is by key elite interests. The nation state is far from being a neutral,
benevolent actor, and exists and intermeshes within a broader context in
conditions fundamentally hostile to any transformative change (Miliband
1969 [2009]). This is particularly the case in Anglo-Saxon countries
where neoliberal narratives have become particularly hegemonic. This
suggests that the opportunities for building an entrepreneurial state vary
significantly across different countries and historical contexts, depending
on the nature of particular configurations of power and capitalist interests
at certain moments. This is borne out by the history of major economic
transformations, which shows that transformation occurs due to multiple
changes occurring at the same time (Schmitz and Scoones 2015).
4 Renewable energy policy in Germany and the UK
The opportunities for green transformations in different countries, and
the different challenges faced as a result, is well illustrated by the divergent
experiences of Germany and the UK in the development of renewable
energy policy. In 2012, whilst renewable energy in Germany accounted
for 24 per cent of total energy demand, it was under half this in the UK. This difference owes itself both to major differences in the approaches
taken by policymakers, divergences in the types of coalitions of interest
groups which were formed around renewable energy policies, and
contextual factors which facilitated better policy in Germany than in the
UK (Lockwood 2014). Whereas German renewable energy policy secured
the active participation of a broad range of actors by offering attractive
returns with low risk and a guaranteed market, thus building up a broad
coalition behind renewable energy, UK policy only provided incentives
for large energy companies to invest. As a result, Germany has established
a relatively vibrant renewable energy sector with substantial employment
effects and broad political buy-in, and efforts to reverse the policies have
been countered by a broad coalition of actors including environmental
groups, solar industry associations and companies, trade unions and local
politicians. By contrast, British policy has allowed subsidies to be captured
by large and unpopular energy companies, making green energy policy
politically unpopular and vulnerable to cutbacks (ibid.).
The implications of the contrasting experiences of Germany and the UK are twofold. On the one hand, as Lockwood argues, policymakers need to consider policy feedback effects, and need to implement policies which are likely to generate new coalitions and interest groups which will strive to scale up a given policy and make it successful. The second implication, however, is that some countries experience greater levels of path dependency than others. The fact that Germany established more far-reaching policies in the first place was partly a consequence of contextual factors. Whereas Germany could count on a network of regional banks, a legacy of policy coordination between private actors and the state, a willingness to use non-market mechanisms to promote renewable energy, and a federal, decentralised democracy, the UK had none of these things due to its more doctrinaire adherence to neoliberalism and scepticism of deliberate industrial policy (Lockwood 2014).
Moreover, Germany's renewable energy policy was consistently promoted by the country's relatively strong Green Party, which benefited from a proportional representation system, allowing smaller parties to exercise influence, in contrast with the UK where environmental concerns have been consistently marginalised in Parliament. These contextual differences manifested in divergences in policymaking which had far-reaching feedback effects.
Furthermore, high levels of inequality which prevail in the UK make
it harder to build the broad-based alliances necessary to address the
challenges of sustainability (Wilkinson, Pickett and De Vogli 2010),
and may have caused stronger negative policy feedback effects against
green policies, because of greater fears of their adverse distributional
consequences (Lockwood 2014). The case study thus illustrates the ways
that dominant economic structures, narratives and understandings
of the economy are likely to have a decisive influence over the types
of policies used to address climate change (ibid.). This suggests that
countries such as the UK which suffer from high levels of negative path
dependency are likely to require even more thoroughgoing, radical and
contestatory institutional transformation than other countries if they are
to make a serious contribution to addressing climate change.
5 The green economy and democracy
Given that achieving green transformations will inevitably require a
degree of contestation, it is necessary to examine the precise relationship
between contestation, democracy and institution building in the
formation of the entrepreneurial state-type institutions advocated by
Mazzucato. Mazzucato emphasises the importance of having a state
which can avoid bowing to the interest groups seeking rents and privileges
in the form of tax cuts. However, it is unclear how a state capable of this
degree of autonomy can be brought into being if it is already subject to a
high degree of elite capture, and how 'mission-oriented' public institutions
capable of decisively tilting the playing field in favour of democratically
chosen objectives can be forged in the absence of elite acquiescence. In
fact, many of the positive examples of the entrepreneurial state provided
by Mazzucato come from contexts of relative elite consensus around
the need for entrepreneurial state-type institutions, in some cases linked
to unaccountable and militaristic programmes such as the Defence
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
Meanwhile, in developing countries virtually all the successful examples of the application of heterodox economics are associated with right-wing authoritarian regimes which actively repressed civil society, especially trade unions (Selwyn 2014). Recent years have seen a continuation of this trend, with Ethiopia and Rwanda increasingly lauded for their progress in incorporating aspects of the success of the East Asian developmentalist states whilst simultaneously charting out paths towards a 'green economy' through authoritarian models of 'developmental patrimonialism' (Booth 2011; Kelsall 2013). Furthermore, most of the successful examples of developmental transformation clearly emerged from processes which were experimental, context-specific, and based on transitional arrangements rather than driven by an overarching vision (Hobday 2003; Qian 2003), limiting the extent to which they provide a clear blueprint for green transformations in the future.
In other instances, governments which have successfully implemented
elements of the state-led developmentalism advocated by Mazzucato may
see it in their interest to crush the nascent efforts of other governments
to do the same, as the German government did to Greece's Syriza-led
government in 2015. This indicates the limitations of methodological
nationalist approaches which see approaches taken in countries in
isolation from one another. Meanwhile, there are few examples of
countries which have successfully employed heterodox economics
through democratic mandates and in the face of elite opposition, with
Ecuador standing out as a possible recent rare exception (see Ordóñez
et al. 2015). The August 2016 coup in Brazil and subsequent threats of
privatisation of the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES), a historically
successful example of an institution that has channelled finance towards
long-term clean energy projects, show that even relatively established and
institutionalised cases of the entrepreneurial state can still be vulnerable
to reversal due to elite opposition.
This raises questions of the relationship between the green economy and democratic participation, as well as the potential and limitations of attempting to repeat models of innovation which were effective under particular configurations of power in a different context. While there are historical examples of the formation of the types of collaborative institutions that are likely to be necessary to bring about genuinely transformative change, green coalitions depend on particular convergences of different interest groups which do not exist equally across all societies at all times (Newell 2015). As a result, there is nothing even approaching a historical blueprint for processes of change to form institutions which are equipped to address the challenges of the twentyfirst century. This would require institutions which incorporate both elements of long-term strategic planning, on the one hand, and are also capable of democratically challenging vested interests and empowering the poorest and historically most excluded sectors of society on the other. To date, however, most discussions of innovation for the green economy have taken a top-down direction, barely considering the possibility that solutions could come from local people themselves (Ely et al. 2013).
In contrast with the notion of transformation as a carefully controlled,
strategic 'transition', others argue in favour of bottom-up, unpredictable,
unruly processes of change – which are inherently more democratic and
hold more transformative potential in any case (Stirling 2014). Involving
a more diverse range of actors and considering different approaches
may allow better responses to complexity than top-down ones, as well
as avoiding unwelcome path dependency and the dangers of major
errors that emerge from the exclusion of key actors at key moments
of the innovation process (Leach et al. 2012). Top-down approaches to innovation and policy change often overlook the historical role
of grass-roots innovators in building up the actor networks, political
pressure and technological knowledge necessary for renewable energy
to get off the ground in the first place, as occurred with the Danish wind
sector (Ely et al. 2013).
There are, of course, dangers associated with the potential for
romanticisation of the participation of local 'communities', namely
that decades of uneven and in some cases contradictory experiences
of community-based or participatory policymaking are forgotten,
simply due to a determination to disassociate from 'top-down'
models. As Immerwahr (2015) argues, community-based approaches
to policymaking have a history which goes back far further than is
commonly recognised, and have frequently been associated with local level
elite capture, exclusion, and perverse forms of disempowerment
which may actually inhibit people from engaging in broader structural
issues (see, for example, Mansuri and Rao 2012, for a review of
attempts to promote community-based approaches in developing
countries). Even when community politics is deeply embedded in a
society and serves as an effective instrument for achieving a variety
of objectives, this needs to be underpinned by a practical logic rather
than a purely ideological or 'visionary' one, and may exact major
constraints on individuals' actions (Godfrey-Wood and Mamani-Vargas
2016). Such initiatives also need to be genuinely political if they are to
avoid contradictions and have a chance at achieving lasting structural
change, rather than becoming depoliticised, over-reliant on compromise
and vulnerable to co-optation as occurred with the Transition Towns
movement in the UK (Connors and McDonald 2010). In spite of these
significant caveats, the challenges of climate change, the complexity of
twenty-first century societies, the limits of approaches which depend on
centrally-managed, technocratic approaches, as well as the distributed
nature of much renewable energy means that the argument for
decentralised, locally-run energy systems is likely to get stronger rather
than weaker. Crucially, broad-based participation and engagement is a
pre-requisite for green policies to be sustained, rather than experienced
as impositions by technocrats (Schmitz and Scoones 2015).
This takes us to the role of social movements, including trade unions,
who have a stake in wanting to direct processes of innovation in favour
of skilled and secure jobs. Historically, there is evidence to suggest
that successful organisation by workers for better wages and working
conditions can be used to force firms to invest in productivity-enhancing
technology which drives the overall economy (Riley and Rosazza
Bondibene 2015). The political sustainability of green transformations
is likely to depend heavily on the extent and quality of job creation or
destruction (Newell 2015). Massive unionisation of the workplace, as
well as worker representation in directing processes of innovation, seems
like the most direct way in which the direction of the green economy
can be genuinely democratised. A key example of participatory
decentralised green policymaking is that of the Lucas Plan of the 1970s, which was devised by workers who proposed rechannelling public
financing from arms production to socially useful production including
renewable energy (Smith 2014). Of course, advocating for this sort of
approach will be challenging, in societies where workers' rights have
been relentlessly attacked, labour has been flexibilised and restructured
away from manufacturing industries (which are most likely to mobilise),
and the very notion of union organisation has been undermined.
6 Conclusion
In this article, I have outlined the inadequacy of existing institutions and
institutional approaches to addressing the challenges of the twenty-first
century, with specific reference to climate change. Subsequently, I have
discussed the potential of employing Mazzucato's 'entrepreneurial
state' approach as a means of allowing governments to democratically
determine not only the rate but also the direction of technological
innovation in accordance with publicly defined objectives. The main
challenges of this approach are twofold: firstly, forging an entrepreneurial
state in the face of substantial elite resistance from actors which have a
stake in perpetuating short-termist, speculative and polluting activities;
secondly, employing it in a way which is both sufficiently democratic to
fully harness the range of ideas and capacities that exist in a society, as
well as securing broad-based buy-in from diverse groups for a sustainable
transition. In order to meet these challenges, processes attempting to
forge 'entrepreneurial state'-type institutions will necessarily have to
be contestatory, and will have to actively involve non-elite actors in the
formulation of policy, in order to drive processes which are as 'unruly'
and 'hope inspired' as they are 'strategic' and 'mission-oriented'.
References
Atkinson, A.B. (2015) Inequality: What Can Be Done? Cambridge MA and
London: Harvard University Press
Booth, D. (2011) 'Introduction: Working with the Grain? The Africa
Power and Politics Programme', IDS Bulletin 42.2: 1–10,
(accessed
10 October 2016)
Connors, P. and McDonald, P. (2010) 'Transitioning Communities:
Community, Participation and the Transition Town Movement',
Community Development Journal 45.2: 1–15
Ely, A.; Smith, A.; Stirling, A.; Leach, M. and Scoones, I. (2013)
'Innovation Politics Post-Rio+20: Hybrid Pathways to Sustainability',
Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 31: 1063–81
Fuentes-Neiva, R. and Galasso, N. (2014) Working for the Few: Political
Capture and Economic Inequality, Oxfam Briefing Paper 178,
(accessed September 2016)
Godfrey-Wood, R. and Mamani-Vargas, G. (2016) 'The Coercive Side
of Collective Capabilities: Evidence from the Boliviano Altiplano',
Journal of Human Development and Capabilities
Haldane, A. (2016) 'The Costs of Short-Termism', in M. Jacobs and M. Mazzucato (eds), Rethinking Capitalism: Economics and Policy for Sustainable Growth, Chichester: Wiley Blackwell
Hobday, M. (2003) 'Innovation in Asian Industrialization:
A Gerschenkronian Perspective', Oxford Development Studies 31.3:
293–314
Hsu, S.L. (2014) 'The Rise and Rise of the One Percent: Considering
the Legal Causes of Wealth Inequality', Emory Law Journal Online 64:
2043–72
Immerwahr, D. (2015) Thinking Small: The United States and the Lure
of Community Development, Cambridge MA and London: Harvard
University Press
Kelsall, T. (2013) Business, Politics, and the State in Africa: Challenging the
Orthodoxies on Growth and Transformation, London: Zed Books
Lazonick, W. (2014) 'Profits Without Prosperity', Harvard Business Review
92.9: 46–55
Leach, M.; Scoones, I. and Stirling, A. (2010) Dynamic Sustainabilities:
Technology, Environment, Social Justice, London: Earthscan
Leach, M.; Rockström, J.; Raskin, P.; Scoones, I.; Stirling, A.C.; Smith, A.; Thompson, J.; Millstone, E.; Ely, A.; Arond, E.; Folke, C.
and Olsson, P. (2012) 'Transforming Innovation for Sustainability',
Ecology and Society 17.2:11. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04933-170211 (accessed 12 October 2016)
Lockwood, M. (2014) The Political Dynamics of Green Transformations: The Roles of Policy Feedback and Institutional Context, EPG Working Paper 1403, Exeter: Energy Policy Group, University of Exeter
Mansuri, G. and Rao, V. (2012) Localizing Development: Does Participation
Work? World Bank Policy Research Report, Washington DC: World
Bank
Mazzucato, M. (2016) 'Innovation, the State and Patient Capital', in M. Jacobs and M. Mazzucato (eds), Rethinking Capitalism: Economics
and Policy for Sustainable Growth, Chichester: Wiley Blackwell
Mazzucato, M. (2013) The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private
Sector Myths, London: Anthem Press
Milanovic, B. (2016) Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of
Globalization, Cambridge MA and London: Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press
Miliband, R. (2009 [1969]) The State in Capitalist Society, London: Merlin
Press
Newell, P. (2015) 'The Politics of Green Transformation in Capitalism',
in I. Scoones, M. Leach and P. Newell (eds), The Politics of Green
Transformations, New York NY: Routledge
Newell, P. and Paterson, M. (2011) 'Climate Capitalism', in E. Altvater
and A. Brunnengraber (eds), After Cancun: Climate Governance or Climate
Conflicts, Berlin: VS Verlag
Ordóñez, A.; Samman, E.; Mariotti, C. and Borja Borja, I.M.
(2015) Sharing the Fruits of Progress: Poverty Reduction in Ecuador,
ODI Development Progress, (accessed
4 September 2016)
Polanyi, K. (2001 [1944]) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, Boston MA: Beacon Press Books
Qian, Y. (2003) 'How Reform Worked in China', in D. Rodrick (ed.),
In Search of Prosperity: Analytic Narratives on Economic Growth,
Princeton NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press: 297–333
Riley, R. and Rosazza Bondibene, C. (2015) Raising the Standard:
Minimum Wages and Productivity, NIESR Discussion Paper 449,
National Institute of Economic and Social Research,
(accessed 4 September 2016)
Schmitz, H. (2015) 'Green Transformation: Is There a Fast Track?', in
I. Scoones, M. Leach and P. Newell, The Politics of Green Transformations,
New York NY: Routledge
Schmitz, H. and Scoones, I. (2015) Accelerating Sustainability: Why Political
Economy Matters, IDS Evidence Report 152, Brighton: IDS,
(accessed 4 September 2016)
Selwyn, B. (2014) The Global Development Crisis, Cambridge: Polity Press
Smith, A. (2014) Socially Useful Production, STEPS Working Paper 58, Brighton: STEPS Centre, (accessed 4 September 2016)
Stiglitz, J. (2012) The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society
Endangers Our Future, New York NY and London: W.W. Norton & Co.
Stiglitz, J. and Greenwald, B.C. (2014) Creating a Learning Society: A New
Approach to Growth, Development, and Social Progress, New York NY:
Columbia University Press
Stirling, A. (2014) Emancipating Transformations: From Controlling 'The
Transition' to Culturing Plural Radical Progress, STEPS Working
Paper 64, Brighton: STEPS Centre
Wilkinson, R.G.; Pickett, K.E. and De Vogli, R. (2010) 'Equality,
Sustainability, and Quality of Life', British Medical Journal 341: c5816
Zenghelis, D. (2016) 'Decarbonisation: Innovation and the Economics of Climate Change', in M. Jacobs and M. Mazzucato (eds), Rethinking Capitalism: Economics and Policy for Sustainable Growth, Chichester: Wiley Blackwell
© 2016 The Author. IDS Bulletin © Institute of Development Studies | DOI: 10.19088/1968-2016.187
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0
International licence, which permits downloading and sharing provided the original authors and source are credited – but
the work is not used for commercial purposes. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode
The IDS Bulletin is published by Institute of Development Studies, Library Road, Brighton BN1 9RE, UK
This article is part of IDS Bulletin Vol. 47 No. 2A November 2016: 'States, Markets and Society – New Relationships for a New Development Era'; the Introduction is also recommended reading.