The Western capitalist system is an important part of the economy and society of the contemporary world, and it has played a huge role in the past few centuries. Nonetheless, with the continuous development of globalization, technological revolution and social change, the Western capitalist system is also facing a series of difficulties and new changes. This paper aims to explore the dilemma facing the Western capitalist system today, and to analyze and discuss the new changes.

This study uses dynamic capability theory and a resource-based view to examine whether intellectual capital (human, relational, and structural capital) mediates entrepreneurial leadership and innovation success. Drawing on data from 422 senior-level employees working in Peruvian I.T. companies, the proposed relationships were analyzed using SmartPLS 4. Entrepreneurial leadership was found to foster employees’ innovative performance through the mediating role of human capital, relational capital, and structural capital. Practically, businesses often rely on innovation for survival and growth, so they should consider entrepreneurial leadership to create intellectual capital (human capital, relational capital and structural capital) for innovation performance. Businesses should provide entrepreneurial training that emphasizes role modeling intellectual capital and encourages employees to recognize and pursue entrepreneurial opportunities. With significantly limited research, the study contributes by investigating the interrelationship of entrepreneurial leadership, intellectual capital, and innovation performance. The study contributes to the Resource Based View and Dynamic Capability Theory by demonstrating how entrepreneurial leadership contributes to innovation performance through human capital, relational capital, and structural capital.

COVID-19 has amplified existing imbalances, institutional and financing constraints associated with a development strategy that did not take sufficient account of challenges with emissions, environmental damage and health risks associated with climate change in a number of countries, including China. The recovery from the pandemic can be combined with appropriately designed investments that take into account human, social, natural and physical capital, as well as distributional objectives, that can also address commitments under the Paris agreement. An important criterion for sustainable development is that the tax regimes at the national and sub-national levels should reflect the same criteria as the investment strategy. Own-source revenues, are essential to be able to access private financing, including local government bonds and PPPs in a sustainable manner. Governance criteria are also important including information on the buildup of liabilities at all levels of government, to ensure transparent governance.
Despite differences in political systems, the Chinese experiences are relevant in a wide range of emerging market countries as the measures utilize institutions and policies reflecting international best practices, including modern tax administrations for the VAT, and income taxes, and benefit-linked property taxes, as well as utilization of balance sheets information consistent with the IMF’s Government Financial Statistics Manual, 2014. The options have significant implications for policy advice and development cooperation for meeting global climate change goals while ensuring sustainable employment generation with transparency and accountability.

The project finance scenario has changed significantly around the world after the 2008 financial crisis and following the subsequent Basel III recommendations. Project finance loans from commercial banks and financial institutions have largely dried up, leaving it mostly to the export credit agencies and the bilateral and multilateral development banks to provide the institutional credit. Unfortunately, those sources are not enough, given the huge needs for construction of new infrastructure and renovation of the old ones across Asia, Africa and Latin America. The need for capital markets, through market listed financial products across asset class, unlocking a large part of domestic and corporate savings, has never been felt as strongly before. This article seeks to analyze the development story of various Asian capital markets and examine financial products, which have succeeded in their short history in receiving investor interest. The article also delves into the challenges to market development, policy imperatives and the issues relating to market liquidity and credit rating, which are the most significant influencers for public market float and investor interest.

To analyze the effect of an increase in the quantity or quality of public investment on growth, this paper extends the World Bank’s Long-Term Growth Model (LTGM), by separating the total capital stock into public and private portions, with the former adjusted for its quality. The paper presents the LTGM public capital extension and accompanying freely downloadable Excel-based tool. It also constructs a new infrastructure efficiency index, by combining quality indicators for power, roads, and water as a cardinal measure of the quality of public capital in each country. In the model, public investment generates a larger boost to growth if existing stocks of public capital are low, or if public capital is particularly important in the production function. Through the lens of the model and utilizing newly-collated cross-country data, the paper presents three stylized facts and some related policy implications. First, the measured public capital stock is roughly constant as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) across income groups, which implies that the returns to new public investment, and its effect on growth, are roughly constant across development levels. Second, developing countries are relatively short of private capital, which means that private investment provides the largest boost to growth in low-income countries. Third, low-income countries have the lowest quality of public capital and the lowest efficient public capital stock as a share of GDP. Although this does not affect the returns to public investment, it means that improving the efficiency of public investment has a sizable effect on growth in low-income countries. Quantitatively, a permanent 1 ppt GDP increase in public investment boosts growth by around 0.1–0.2 ppts over the following few years (depending on the parameters), with the effect declining over time.

This paper uses a new cross-country cross-industry dataset on investment in tangible and intangible assets for 18 European countries and the US.  We set out a framework for measuring intangible investment and capital stocks and their effect on output, inputs and total factor productivity. The analysis provides evidence on the diffusion of intangible investment across Europe and the US over the years 2000-2013 and offers growth accounting evidence before and after the Great Recession in 2008-2009. Our major findings are the following. First, tangible investment fell massively during the Great Recession and has hardly recovered, whereas intangible investment has been relatively resilient and recovered fast in the US but lagged behind in the EU. Second, the sources of growth analysis including only national account intangibles (software, R&D, mineral exploration and artistic originals), suggest that capital deepening is the main driver of growth, with tangibles and intangibles accounting for 80% and 20% in the EU while both account for 50% in the US, over 2000-2013. Extending the asset boundary to the intangible assets not included in the national accounts (Corrado, Hulten and Sichel (2005)) makes capital deepening increase. The contribution of tangibles is reduced both in the EU and the US (60% and 40% respectively) while intangibles account for a larger share (40% in EU and 60% in the US). Then, our analysis shows that since the Great Recession, the slowdown in labour productivity growth has been driven by a decline in TFP growth with relatively a minor role for tangible and intangible capital. Finally, we document a significant correlation between stricter employment protection rules and less government investment in R&D, and a lower ratio of intangible to tangible investment.