Does drawing economic benefit from nature impinge on conservation? This has been a subject of controversy in the literature. The article presents a management method to overcome this possible dilemma, and reconcile conservation biology with economics. It is based on recent advances in the mathematical theory of dynamic systems under viability constraints. In the case of a one-locus two-allele plant coexisting with a one-locus two-allele parasite, the method provides a rule for deciding when and to what extent the resistant or the susceptible strain should be cultivated, in the uncertain time-varying presence of the parasite. This is useful for preventing the fixation of the susceptible allele - and thereby limiting the plant's vulnerability in the medium term, should the parasite reappear. The method thus provides an aid to decision for economic and ecology-friendly profitability.

We solve a linear-quadratic model of a spatio-temporal economy using a polluting one-input technology. Space is continuous and heterogenous: locations differ in productivity, nature self-cleaning technology and environmental awareness. The unique link between locations is transboundary pollution which is modelled as a PDE diffusion equation. The spatio-temporal functional is quadratic in local consumption and linear in pollution. Using a dynamic programming method adapted to our infinite dimensional setting, we solve the associated optimal control problem in closed-form and identify the asymptotic (optimal) spatial distribution of pollution. We show that optimal emissions will decrease at given location if and only if local productivity is larger than a threshold which depends both on the local pollution absorption capacity and environmental awareness. Furthermore, we numerically explore the relationship between the spatial optimal distributions of production and (asymptotic) pollution in order to uncover possible (geographic) environmental Kuznets curve cases.

The pure risk sharing mechanism implies that financial liberalization is growth enhancing for all countries as the world portfolio shifts from safe low-yield capital to riskier high-yield capital. This result is typically obtained under the assumption that the volatilities for risky assets prevailing under autarky are not altered after liberalization. We relax this assumption within a simple two-country model of intertemporal portfolio choices. By doing so, we put together the risk sharing effect and a well-defined instability effect. We identify the conditions under which liberalization may cause a drop in growth. These conditions combine the typical threshold conditions outlined in the literature, which concern the deep characteristics of the economies, and size conditions on the instability effect induced by liberalization.

We consider an autocracy where the ruling elite control both the resource wealth and education policies. Education prompts economic growth and enriches the budget of the elite. However, education also increases the “awareness of citizens” – capturing their reluctance to accept a dictatorship and their labor market aspirations – and forces the elite to expand redistribution or handover the power. A power handover leads to a more democratic regime, where the elite retains (at least partially) its economic power. This trade-off is the backbone of our Lipsetian theory of voluntary power handover. This theory provides new insights on the positive relationship between economic development, education, and democratization, and on the negative relationship between inequality and democratization. Finally, we revisit the resources-curse hypothesis within our setting.