000			02145nab a2200301 c 4500
999			_c141733 _d141733
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20200207141914.0
007			ta
008			200207t2019 uk ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
041			_aeng
100	1		_964063 _aBailey, Daniel
245		0	_aRe-thinking the fiscal and monetary political economy of the green state _cDan Bailey
260			_c2020
500			_aDisponible también en formato electrónico.
500			_aResumen.
504			_aBibliografía.
520			_aProponents of the Green State repudiate the historical antipathy to the state from many in the green movement and endorse the pragmatic usage of state capacity and legitimacy to realise environmental protection. This article offers a sympathetic critique of the Green State’s fiscal and monetary institutional design in order to refine the concept further. It will investigate an under-theorised contradiction in the political economy of the Green State; centring upon the operationalisation of an interventionist state, moving beyond economic growth, and deference to the ceteris paribus conventions of state financing. It is argued that the three cannot co-exist harmoniously, given the ramifications of moving beyond growth for the fiscal capacity of the state. Therefore, there is a need to go further than even Eckersley does in re-politicising and challenging capitalist conventions. Specifically, Eckersley’s own critical constructivist approach is invoked to interrogate the capitalist conventions that constitute the constraints surrounding state financing, such as the depoliticised production of money and the viability of debt relations.
650		4	_948056 _aPOLITICA DEL MEDIO AMBIENTE
650		4	_948067 _aPOLITICA FISCAL
650		4	_947492 _aMEDIO AMBIENTE
650		4	_947460 _aIMPUESTOS
650		4	_967791 _aECOLOGISMO
650		4	_949639 _aDESARROLLO SOSTENIBLE
773	0		_9161842 _oOP 1642/2020/1 _tNew political economy _w(IEF)125203 _x 1356-3467 _g v. 25, n. 1, January 2020
856			_uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13563467.2018.1526267
942			_cART