This paper highlights the problems that neoclassical theory encounters in providing a comprehensive explanation of the process of economic change. Whereas institutionalism combined with conventionalism has the merit of conceptualising economic and social processes, showing that institutions are the result of social interaction and not just structures produced by rational and maximising individuals. The Economics of Convention provides a theory of rules that is close to institutional foundations. Thus, an institutionalist-conventionalist approach will explain the interaction between individuals and institutions, shaping goals and desires, in a process of economic change due to institutional change.

The nature of the impact of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on environmental pollution is unclear from the available literature and the present paper examines the short-run and long-run association of FDI with carbon emissions (CO2) in BRICS countries (Brazile, Russia, India, China and South Africa). The study estimates the panel data for the BRICS region from 1992 to 2018 with yearly frequency through panel cointegration test, panel vector error correction model and panel variance decomposition. The results, though have not found any long-run relation between FDI and CO2, they indicate that carbon emissions reduce in BRICS countries with increasing FDI in the short run and support the pollution halo hypothesis. This implies that the Multi-national Companies (MNCs) shift relatively cleaner industries and transfer greener technologies to BRICS. The results also indicate reverse causation running from CO2 to FDI in the short run. Furthermore, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the BRICS region appears to be directly influenced by both FDI and CO2. Findings suggested that BRICS countries should furthermore liberalise FDI policies and parallelly tighten the environmental regulations alongside creating awareness and enhancing the capabilities of the country to absorb efficient and eco-friendly technologies. Policies should provide impetus to industries to shift energy-efficient technologies and less emitting equipment.

George Josef Stigler is known as the scientist who strongly influenced the formation of the Chicago School of Economics. He promoted the idea of expanding price theory beyond the boundaries of economics and developed it into a universal model for the analysis of human behaviour, known as the economic approach to human behaviour. His research inspired the Public Choice literature and the Economic Theory of Law. Besides, Stigler made numerous contributions which nowadays are integral parts of economic theory. In this essay we summarize some of Stigler’s outstanding contributions, particularly his work on information economics and the economic theory of regulation.

The article examines the conditions for leadership and team thriving. The goal is to detail and extend a theory of ‘thriving leadership’ based on an analysis of Bulgarian and international research in this field. Leadership theories are analyzed in support of thriving leadership, examining in detail its layers – individual (coaching, communication, leadership, emotions and change), team (leadership as a dynamic phenomenon of group dynamics, global cross-cultural and virtual teams, and the question of meaning and purpose) and organizational (The “Bulgarian dream” and B-Corporations movement). The author's thrive matrix is presented, explaining the internal conditions for personal leadership thriving.

We are witnessing a heated debate among all professional communities on how to evaluate the scientific work of scientists. Are articles or books more valuable? What makes a text scientific? Is just having a DOI number enough to do so?

Why does the marginal utility of a page change so drastically on the 20th page of a BSS (1800 characters per page) that no one has used for years? And after the 100th, the marginal utility (for an Academic Staff Development Act - ASDA - procedure) of every subsequent page is zero (if it's a standalone book)? I am struck by the lack of public evaluation of the substance of colleagues' scholarly output, unless it is a procedure under the APA.