Citizens and the future of multilateralism in a polycentric world at 2030: the perspectives of emerging countries for the trading system: the impasse of WTO, the trends of mega agreements, the logic of value chains and the advent of consumers concerns on international trade

A new paradigm is modeling the World: evolutionary innovations in all fronts, new information technologies, huge mobility of capital, use of risky financial tools, globalization of production, new emerging powers and the impact of consumer concerns on governmental policies. These phenomena are shaping the World and forcing the advent of a new World Order in the Multilateral Monetary, Financial, and Trading System. The effects of this new paradigm are also transforming global governance. The political and economic orders established after the World War and centered on the multilateral model of UN, IMF, World Bank, and the GATT, leaded by the developed countries, are facing significant challenges. The rise of China and emerging countries shifted the old model to a polycentric World, where the governance of these organizations are threatened by emerging countries demanding a bigger participation in the role and decision boards of these international bodies. As a consequence, multilateralism is being confronted by polycentrism. Negotiations for a more representative voting process and the pressure for new rules to cope with the new demands are paralyzing important decisions. This scenario is affecting seriously not only the Monetary and Financial Systems but also the Multilateral Trading System. International trade is facing some significant challenges: a serious deadlock to conclude the last round of the multilateral negotiation at the WTO, the fragmentation of trade rules by the multiplication of preferential and mega agreements, the arrival of a new model of global production and trade leaded by global value chains that is threatening the old trade order, and the imposition of new sets of regulations by private bodies commanded by transnationals to support global value chains and non-governmental organizations to reflect the concerns of consumers in the North based on their precautionary attitude about sustainability of products made in the World. The lack of any multilateral order in this new regulation is creating a big cacophony of rules and developing a new regulatory war of the Global North against the Global South. The objective of this paper is to explore how these challenges are affecting the Tradinge System and how it can evolve to manage these new trends.

The Ricardian vice and the indetermination of senior

The general commitments and working requirements of abstract, applied, and art of science, including economics, are assessed. Pure economics deals with the logic of the phenomenon. Positive socio-economics presupposes pure economics and many distinct sciences. Art presupposes socio-economics and direct knowledge of the specificities which characterize the time-space individuality of the phenomenon. This indetermination was partially formulated by Senior and Mill; graduate education in economics is considered in its light. The habit of ignoring it is the Ricardian Vice, as named by Schumpeter; the prevalence of the vice is exemplified, and its causes analyzed.

The Indetermination of Senior

The commitments and working requirements of abstract, applied, and art of, economics are assessed within an analogy with the fields of inert matter and life. Abstract economics is the pure logic of the phenomenon. Applied positive economics presupposes many distinct abstract sciences. Art presupposes applied economics and direct knowledge of the specificities which characterize the time-space individuality of the phenomenon. This is an indetermination clearly formulated by Senior and Mill; its connection with institutionalism is discussed. The Ricardian Vice is the habit of ignoring the indetermination; its prevalence in mainstream economics is exemplified, and its causes analyzed.

Microfoundations of open innovation: the creation of open innovation management organizations

Desde que Chesbrough (2003) cunhou o termo inovação aberta, o conceito tem atraído uma atenção crescente tanto no meio acadêmico quanto no mundo empresarial. Apesar dos esforços crescentes em explorar práticas de inovação aberta, muitas perguntas permanecem sem resposta. A pesquisa acadêmica expandiu o foco abordando o tema de forma bastante ampla como gestão da inovação, estratégia empresarial, comportamento organizacional e políticas públicas. Ao mesmo tempo, gestores também têm explorado na prática o conceito de inovação aberta de formas muito diversificadas. Levando em conta a variabilidade das práticas de inovação aberta, este estudo visa fornecer microfundamentos para a inovação aberta, adotando a teoria de effectuation. A teoria de effectuation foi originalmente desenvolvida no campo da pesquisa sobre empreendedorismo. Pode ser definida como um conjunto de princípios de tomada de decisão que pode ser ensinado e aprendido, formando uma lógica global empregada por empreendedores com expertise frente a situações de incerteza durante a criação de novos empreendimentos e novos mercados (SARASVATHY, 2001; 2008). Nós demostramos que a teoria effectuation tem a consistência para fornecer uma contribuição sólida no nível micro das práticas de inovação aberta. Neste trabalho, realizamos um estudo de caso extensivo sobre uma organização de gestão da inovação aberta destinada a promover a colaboração entre Brasil e Suécia. Examinamos os processos de tomada de decisão de 13 especialistas em R&D e gerentes de inovação que juntos representam oito diferentes entidades envolvidas em sua criação. Como resultado de nossa pesquisa, identificamos e descrevemos a metodologia de tomada de decisão utilizada pelos gestores de inovação envolvidos na criação de uma organização dedicada à gestão da inovação aberta. As percepções frutos da pesquisa realizada nos permitiu desenvolver um quadro de tomada de decisão com base nas teorias de effectuation e inovação aberta, capaz de apoiar gestores na criação de novas organizações dedicadas à gestão da inovação aberta.

Important, unimportant a critical anticipation of the assumptions of legal positivism in Alice in Wonderland

Almost a full century separates Lewis’ Alice in Wonderland (1865) and the second, lengthier and more elaborate edition of Hans Kelsen’s Pure Theory of Law (1960; first edition published in 1934). And yet, it is possible to argue that the former anticipates and critically addresses many of the philosophical assumptions that underlie and are elemental to the argument of the latter. Both texts, with the illuminating differences that arise from their disparate genre, have as one of their key themes norms and their functioning. Wonderland, as Alice soon finds out, is a world beset by rules of all kinds: from the etiquette rituals of the mad tea-party to the changing setting for the cricket game to the procedural insanity of the trial with which the novel ends. Pure Theory of Law, as Kelsen emphatically stresses, has the grundnorm as the cornerstone upon which the whole theoretical edifice rests2. This paper discusses some of the assumptions underlying Kelsen’s argument as an instance of the modern worldview which Lewis satirically scrutinizes. The first section (Sleepy and stupid) discusses Lewis critique of the idea that, to correctly apprehend an object (in the case of Kelsen’s study, law), one has to free it from its alien elements. The second section (Do bats eat cats?) discusses the notion of systemic coherence and its impact on modern ways of thinking about truth, law and society. The third section (Off with their heads!) explores the connections between readings of systems as neutral entities and the perpetuation of political power. The fourth and final section (Important, Unimportant) explains the sense in which a “critical anticipation” is both possible and useful to discuss the philosophical assumptions structuring some positivist arguments. It also discusses the reasons for choosing to focus on Kelsen’s work, rather than on that of Lewis’ contemporary, John Austin, whose The Province of Jurisprudence Determined (published in 1832) remains influential in legal debates today.