Archive

SOAS Anti-Corruption Evidence and the Institute for New Economic Thinking are convening a two-day conference for UK-based early career researchers working on governance, corruption, and related political economy issues in the Global South.

What if the AI future being sold to markets rests on claims that cannot survive scrutiny? From superintelligence to mass job loss, the loudest promises around generative AI begin to look less like foresight than hype dressed up as inevitability.

The Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) and the Cambridge Central Asia Forum, University of Cambridge, in partnership with The Green Industrial Policy in the Age of Rare Metals: A Transregional Comparison of Growth Strategies in Rare Earth Mining Project (Funded by European Research Council (ERC) administered by University of Sussex, UK., are organizing the Research in Action Workshop 2026: The Science of Critical Minerals and the Realigning Global Order, on 27–28 April 2026 at the University of Cambridge.

AI surveillance and algorithmic management threaten worker autonomy and dignity. It’s time for a rethinking of rights. Part of “AI and the Future of the American Worker,” a series on how artificial intelligence is impacting labor, power, and the meaning of work.

Beneath the grand claims and vast capital spending, AI is delivering weak productivity, mounting losses, and growing financial strain. If the boom cannot generate profits, jobs, or durable gains, how much longer can the bubble hold?

Should antitrust law focus primarily on measurable performance outcomes such as price and output as indicated by Robert Bork’s Consumer Welfare Standard? Or is it more important to concentrate on whether conduct undermines the competitive process itself as per the newly revitalized Protect Competition Standard?

Following a successful inaugural Meeting of Young Minds in 2024 and 2025, the Third annual Meeting of Young Minds on April 09 2026 to April 11 2026 is geared to be an exciting and engaging gathering of future leaders in the field of economics.

The struggle over the Federal Reserve is not just a dispute about central bank independence. It is a constitutional conflict over democratic sovereignty itself: in a representative system, the power to make money belongs first to the legislature, not the executive.

What should courts prioritize in determining antitrust cases: measurable welfare effects, or the protection of competitive rivalry itself? The Consumer Welfare Standard and the Protect Competition Standard offer different answers.

Affordable medicines remain out of reach for millions because pharmaceutical innovation is organized around value extraction, not public health. How do shareholder-driven governance and fragmented global health financing reinforce inequity, and what structural reforms are needed to reverse it?

As the Supreme Court’s unitary executive theory reaches the Federal Reserve, a deeper constitutional question comes into view: who holds the power to make money?

The global medicine-access crisis is not simply a failure to balance innovation and affordability. It reflects a deeper system in which shareholder-driven pharmaceutical governance and fragmented donor structures undermine public health and block the shift toward more equitable value creation.

Less capital, more risk, familiar consequences. The latest move on big-bank rules suggests that too big to fail was never solved, only deferred.

A case for tackling the corporate machinery driving extreme wealth, and the reforms that could truly curb it.

Introduced by the AMA in 2001, Category III CPT codes aimed to streamline financial reporting. Instead they became entangled in a politically driven, zero-sum reimbursement game.