Announcements

INVITATION TO PRESENT PAPERS – REVISTA ECONOMÍA 128

Counter-hegemonic Horizons in the Crisis of Capitalism: Limits and extent of the transition to alternative economic models at the local and global levels

In the crises inherent to the capitalist world-system—which reveal the socio-environmental unsustainability of the reproduction of the capitalist mode of production—the proposal of a post-capitalist society faces cross-cutting challenges in all spaces of social reproduction, both at the local and regional level. At the local level, the transition to alternative economic models is hindered by a dependency on the modes of exchange and production rooted in the capitalist model, which permeates economic relations not only in the immediate environment but also at broader scales, such as the regional and global.

In this context, key questions arise: To what extent can local transition projects toward alternative economic models truly be counter-hegemonic or self-suficient if they inevitably continue to operate—at least partially—within a capitalist system upheld by global geopolitical dynamics and transnational projects that continue to define economic power at all levels? What could be the first step in initiating a transition toward an alternative model? Will the efforts of local projects be enough, or will it be necessary to articulate these efforts alongside a rethinking of the global geopolitical architecture, such as that proposed by the BRICS through a multipolar model? ¿Is there any articulation, if at all, between local and regional projects?

These issues prompt a review of the limitations and potential of local and regional efforts to build alternative economies in the face of the unsustainable logic of capital and the neocolonial practices that permeate the global community as a whole. The analysis will focus on the practices of cooperatives, community networks, autonomous movements, and other grassroots initiatives that, from a local perspective, aim to develop forms of production, distribution, and consumption distinct from those dictated by the global capitalist market. The variety of articles gathered in this dossier will help highlight the contrast between local initiatives and large-scale efforts at economic reconfiguration—such as those promoted by the BRICS—by assessing their actual potential for systemic transformation. This analysis aims not only to make visible the promises of these projects but also their tensions, contradictions, and limitations.

Key focus areas in this dossier include:

Internal tensions within local initiatives: This section will explore the challenges faced by cooperatives and autonomous movements in terms of real autonomy, long-term economic sustainability, risks of co-optation by the market or the neoliberal state, and tensions between ideological principles and everyday practices.
Critical comparison between local strategies and macroeconomic processes: A proposed analysis will contrast grassroots, territorially-based projects with international integration or cooperation initiatives, such as those of the BRICS, questioning the extent to which each level of action contributes to the construction of a systemic alternative.
Structural conditions that enhance or limit alternative economies: This engagement will address the social, political, ecological, and technological factors that either enable or constrain the viability of these initiatives, both at the local scale and in their potential for regional or global articulation.
Theoretical perspectives on economic autonomy: Contributions will be encouraged that foster a dialogue among different critical approaches—Marxist, decolonial, communitarian, ecofeminist, among others—that help to understand the conceptual and theoretical foundations of economic autonomy in the face of global capital.
Concrete experiences case studies: Empirical research that presents experiences of emerging alternative economies in diverse geographic contexts, prioritizing those that contribute to a reflection on scale, replicability, and sustainability.

We also welcome submissions that broadly engage with these lines of inquiry or that can contribute to the reflection on economic transition from their own lines of research.

Dossier coordinator

Sofía Núñez Larios | Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (México)

Reception of papers

Until May 1, 2026

Submission of papers

Through the OJS platform (it is mandatory to register as an author)

Publication

November 2026

INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES ECONÓMICAS (IIE)
FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS ECONÓMICAS │UNIVERSIDAD CENTRAL DEL ECUADOR

****************************************************************************************************************************

INVITATION TO PRESENT PAPERS – REVISTA ECONOMÍA 127

Evidence-Based Public Policy

Evidence-Based Public Policy is an approach for the design, monitoring, and evaluation of public policies based on the systematic use of data, economic research, and rigorous analysis for decision-making in the public sector at all levels. Dufflo & Kremer, for example, use Randomization in the Evaluation of Development Effectiveness. The goal of this approach is to improve the advancement of science and technology and to improve the targeting, effectiveness, and efficiency of public policies by basing public policies on data and evidence that are observable and measurable. This is done through scientifically proven methodologies that are relatively more objective (in absolute terms, it is known that there is no total neutrality in science) than ideologies, assumptions, or political pressures. Angrist & Pischke, on their part, used micro econometric techniques to prove or disprove the effectiveness of public programs in the USA and UK. Along the same line, Cameron & Trivedi applied quantitative methods to analyze correlations between public policies and welfare.

The main approaches accepted in this dossier are:

Use of data and empirical analysis: Where rigorous studies, impact evaluations, statistics, and models are used to support decisions, evaluate programs or reformulate them.
Continuous evaluation and monitoring: Where the performance of policies is measured to adjust, modify, or reformulate them based on their real outcomes.
Transparency and accountability: Where access to information and public debate based on evidence are encouraged in all phases of planning public sector plans, programs, and projects.
Interdisciplinarity: Where the need to integrate knowledge from economics, sociology, political science, among other fields of knowledge and real political economy, is evidenced.
Adaptability and continuous improvement: Where policies are reviewed and adjustments are proposed based on new evidence and changable contexts.

In this way, part of the question posed by Robert Heilbroner is addressed, he questioned the social usefulness of economists. Heilbroner, in addition to his questioning, reflected on the role of economists in society and wondered whether they truly contributed to the general well-being or if, instead, their work was too influenced by particular interests and abstract models detached from reality. Other macroeconomists, such as John Maynard Keynes were also concerned with the social relevance of economics, highlighting its impact on public policy and the improvement of collective well-being.