The book brings together representatives of three generations and three disciplines (economics, philosophy and journalism), who freely discuss the main “global social facts” (in the sense of Max Weber) that occurred during the first quarter of the 21st century and the perspectives opened up on the second quarter.  The debate focuses on five main themes: demographic change, technological and economic change, political recomposition, health protection and the climate challenge. The phenomena that have most marked the global consciousness since the beginning of the century are the rise of terrorism – marked by the attack on the World Trade Center – the financial crisis of 2008 and the development of AI since 2022.  These events have led to a questioning of the neoliberal principles defined by the Washington Consensus. The launch of the chatGPT software has revealed the creative destructive power of social networks and AI, and in particular, the ability of digital applications to influence, the monopolistic position of their developers and the speculative nature of their stock market shares. These events have contributed to the rise of populism and authoritarian regimes. In Europe, they have led to a reappraisal of the most permissive and expensive social models. The authors recognize that projecting the 2050 horizon is difficult. They envisage a “Europe that is undoubtedly greyer”, but more united between generations and within each generation.  The authors call for a more rational assessment of the impacts of AI on the organisation of work and social life, a “more participatory and local” democracy, a “reconciliation of health and care”, and a climate transition that better integrates short- and long-term requirements.   Through the sagacity of their exchanges, the authors invite readers to reflect on the control of their destinies. Bruno COLMANT is an economist, teacher and former director of financial institutions and member of the Royal Academy of Belgium. Laurent HUBLET is a philosopher and entrepreneur.  Marie VANCUTSEM is an audiovisual journalist. Jean-Jacques Pluchart

Ferghane Azihari is the son of Comorian emigrants whose parents “did not only flee material poverty. They also escaped pollution that kills six to fifty times more in sub-Saharan Africa than in Western Europe”.  From the introduction, the tone is set for this fascinating critique of the current ecology in our countries.  He dismantles one by one the declinist, Malthusian and anti-capitalist arguments of these movements which, warm and sheltered, dream of becoming good savages again.  He demonstrates that far from ravaging the planet, the technical progress opposed by Greta Thunberg, Nicolas Hulot and others has made it possible to greatly improve the human condition, including in the poorest countries. In a dream world, hunter-gatherers have in reality destroyed more through their overexploitation of resources than agriculture has made it possible to reduce. Technical progress and the industrial revolution have gradually made it possible to reduce pollution in developed countries as well as reducing working hours.  The real solution is therefore to believe in technical progress, associated with individual property which allows the protection of wealth as opposed to collective property, where no one has an interest, as shown by the state of the ZAD of Notre-Dame des Landes.  Regressive ecology is a luxury of rich countries; are we going to force emerging countries to remain at their current economic level, or even regress?  The author also shows that the most radical ecologists are for the most part anti-capitalists who have been reconverted after losing their clientele to technical and social progress, and that this explains their hatred of property and progress. A work that goes against the grain and is ultimately beneficial at a time when prophets of doom are almost the only ones with the right to speak. Ferghane Azihari is a public policy analyst, general delegate of the Free Academy of Human Sciences and member of the Society of Political Economy. Christian Chouffier

Right from the start of the book, the introduction is striking, because based on successive failures on the climate front, the economist fears, at worst, a possible collapse of civilization and, at best, the possible replacement of our liberal democracy by an illiberal and therefore less democratic system because of climate inaction. Through his book, he therefore proposes the solution of introducing a carbon price (CO₂ tax) that could help save the common good in terms of nature in relation to climate change. To do this, in the first part of the book, he shows that the problem of energy transition is a problem of allocating decarbonization efforts among a multitude of economic agents. He highlights a large number of quantified calculations between, on the one hand, the CO² emissions emitted by traditional economic activity, and on the other hand, the actions to be carried out today and tomorrow by economic actors in order to move towards the net zero emissions (NZE) objective by 2050 (limiting global warming to 1.5°C). Then, before tackling carbon taxation, he demonstrates the current contradictions of homo economicus, who wants to do something for the planet, but who in fact does not want to spend more for the same product/service; in other words, the social unacceptability of alternative climate policies. On this subject, he therefore addresses the fact of the stowaway, because the economic actor who acts on decarbonization bears the full cost, and does not benefit in any way from the climatic benefit of this action (the costs are private, and the benefits are socialized). In fact, he goes on to propose and explain his theory of introducing a single carbon tax (of the order of €250/T according to his calculations) equal to the carbon value. The principle being that everyone will make the effort to decarbonize if and only if its cost per ton of CO² avoided is lower than the carbon value. This assumes the establishment of a well-calibrated subsidy system, with this uniform carbon tax generating a social optimum. But in an open world, while the new presidency of the United States is making every effort to deploy its economy with traditional energies, the effort required must take place at the global level and not the national level, hence the problem of the stowaway. In addition, the author highlights an innovative idea proposing that the European Union set up an independent Carbon Central Bank (CCB) to manage the evolution of the price of carbon on an emission permit market covering the entire Union. Subsequently, the goal would be to raise the price of carbon to a level where oil and gas would no longer be competitive with renewable energies. Finally, while there is no simple solution to the energy transition, and many intellectuals today fail to see the challenges posed by the debate surrounding climate policies that are undermining our liberal democracy, economist Grollier simply wanted to show that carbon pricing was the least bad solution. This book helps us understand all the current economic issues we are facing without always realizing their full significance, as well as the major events that are shaping our century, such as electric cars, heat pump heating, soft mobility in cities, green steelmaking, e-fuels for aviation and maritime transport, etc. All that remains is to convince the global population… Christian Gollier is an economist, co-founder and director of the Toulouse School of Economics and his work focuses on the climate economy (recent works: “Entre fin de mois et fin du monde” and “Le climat après la fin du mois”) and on the science of decision-making in uncertainty. Claude GEORGELET

Artificial intelligence has become a cross-cutting technology that concerns all economic sectors and has applications in all use cases as soon as there is a layer of analysis. AI has the potential for systemic transformation by simultaneously changing the way the entire economy produces, organizes and innovates. The financial sector is, of course, not exempt from these changes. Computers in the 1970s enabled the emergence of quantitative finance and the development of sophisticated mathematical models to assess risk and optimize portfolios. But AI is specific by its autonomy, its ability to interact in natural language, to adapt its decisions through learning, to process and analyze huge volumes of data in real time, and to convert textual information into investment strategies. These few examples, already adopted in daily operations, suggest disruptive upheavals in the sector. This issue of the “Revue financière d’économie,” edited by Marie Brière, explores the issues as well as the economic, financial and ethical challenges, and the impacts and risks associated with the increasing integration of AI in the financial sector. Thirteen leading contributors, such as Cédric Villani, Philippe Aghion, Agnès Bénassy-Quéré, to name but a few, provide a valuable synthesis around three main themes. The first is devoted to the economic and financial challenges of deploying AI. It addresses the strategic needs in terms of funding and research related to AI, ethical issues, recalling that humanity invests ten times more in AI and digital technology than in the ecological transition, the impacts on the dissemination of innovation and productivity and finally digital currencies and the role of fintechs as well as central banks. The second part addresses some  use cases of AI and generative AI in finance. The various contributors revisit integration strategies in scoring, payment default, loan applications, insurance claims management, and cyber risk prevention, but show that these productivity gains can be offset by new, less visible risks. In the last part of this issue, the experts focus on the risks and the different regulatory approaches, and in particular on the ability of regulatory authorities to use AI to assist them in their control mission.This issue of the “Revue d’économie financière” offers us a rather comprehensive approach to the current debates on the complex issues of the use of AI in the financial sector. Marie Brière, is Head of Investor Research at Amundi Investment Institute, Associate Researcher at Dauphine and ULB and President of Inquire Europe. Ph Alezard

The authors respond to the main questions raised over the past thirty years by the impacts of global warming and the energy and ecological transitions. They recall the warnings issued since 1990 by the IPCC and other official bodies, as well as the (often disappointed) ambitions set out at the 29 Conferences of the Parties (COP) organized since 1995. They emphasize the importance of COP 21, held in Paris in 2015, which set a target of limiting global warming since the 19th century to 1.5°C by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. The authors reveal that IPCC reports have been the target of a veritable climategate, orchestrated by energy companies, which have sought to discredit the IPCC’s data, processing, and conclusions through biased studies. They also denounce banks that continue to finance projects that harm the environment. They point out that the multiple consequences (particularly on human health) of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are increasingly well documented and that a warming of 3°C or even 4°C would be catastrophic for the planet and humanity. They warn of the severity and simultaneity of recent natural disasters (droughts, floods, etc.). The authors are optimistic, however: they identify the devices to be implemented in order to achieve the objectives set by the COP: new instruments of “green finance”, alternative systems of heating, transportation and production, ecological materials… They show the progress of agroecology to preserve the soil and absorb GHGs, as well as the emergence of geoengineering that extracts carbon monoxide from the atmosphere. They hold up European countries as examples for nation states that are less economical with fossil fuels, such as China and the United States. Alain GRANDJEAN is the co-founder of the firm Carbon 4. Claude HENRY is an honorary professor at the Ecole Polytechnique and the University of Colombia.Jean Jouzel was a member of the IPCC. Jean-Jacques Pluchart

In this latest opus, the authors, who are not at their first book together, look at some long-term proposals to reinvent a social model for France and Europe vis-à-vis the ambitions of the United States and China. This first quarter of the 21st century has been marked by a spectacular drop in the European economy and even more so in the French economy. Since 2002, the US GDP has grown twice as fast as the European GDP. And this slide continues regardless of the elements of analysis: productivity, R&D, investment, employment rate, trade balance, training, etc. France has even fallen behind on its own continent compared to its neighbors. The irresistible French de-industrialization has not been offset by the development of a significant technological sector, the debt and the trade deficit are abyssal, the quality of public services is deteriorating despite an ever-increasing budget deficit, and finally, the wealth per capita is 15% lower than that of Germany. Europe is at odds with Schumpeter and is paying a high price for its risk aversion. 54% of American R&D is devoted to new technologies compared to 15% in Europe, which prefers to continue investing in its old industry. Nine of the top ten European capitalizations are in traditional sectors, while nine out of ten of the American ones are related to new technology and AI. The major advantage of the American model lies in an ecosystem that is conducive to innovation and investment, in stark contrast to the European model, which is hampered by a restrictive fiscal, legislative, and regulatory framework. It could be summed up in a slogan: risk appetite versus the “precautionary principle.”But this very “business friendly” American model hides weaknesses. Inequalities and impoverishment continue to grow, the exorbitant cost of care is a factor of indebtedness, and the financial situation of the Federal State, despite or because of the dollar, is catastrophic. While Donald Trump has promised the Americans to return to the golden age of the McKinley period, will a weakened and demoralized Europe be able to react? To achieve this, it will need to escape the trap of weak growth, regain its dynamism, and defend its position in the global arena. The authors make concrete proposals at both the national and European levels. The urgent reforms needed in France are well known, as are the solutions. Choices will have to be made if we want to preserve our social model. But above all, we will need to find consensus and active involvement in a context where exasperation, deadly dialectics, and mistrust of our leaders are preventing necessary reforms and fueling accusations of democratic models’ inefficiency. Patrick Artus is an economic advisor to Ossiam and a member of the Cercle des économistes Marie-Paule Virard is an economic journalist Ph Alezard

Based on an extensive research program described in the book, the authors’ collective provides a precise overview of the different forms of associations and their resources; with, among other things, the extent of their dependence on public funding.The first part of the book is devoted to setting the framework of associations in the broad sense and to understanding their functioning as well as the plurality of market and non-market financial resources. The analysis of monetary resources shows that associations continue to drain public funding that is decisive for their socio-economic model in order to achieve their budgetary balance. The role of volunteering also remains major in the emergence of projects and in the functioning of associations, although some of them are becoming professionalized.The second part of the book focuses on the socio-economic models of associative social centers. The latter developed at the end of the 19th century in bourgeois circles. Their initial objective was to strengthen family and neighborhood ties during this period of industrial and urban development. Today, according to their purpose, social centers share the goal of fostering links and exchanges. The authors raise the issue of the monetary valuation of volunteering in the accounting balance sheets of this type of association, due to a lack of method.In a third part, the authors present the socio-economic model of “third-places”. This category is defined as a “space of sociability, of citizen initiative, where a community can meet, gather, exchange and share resources, skills and knowledge”. Whatever their actions, “third-places” claim autonomy by relying on non-monetary resources but still remain dependent on public funding.The fourth part of the book focuses on socio-economic models in the field of integration. The authors present their research and analysis in the IAE (Insertion par l’Activité Economique) sector and on the TZC (Territoires Zéro Chômeurs) experiment.In conclusion, the authors highlight three avenues for reflection: the mobilization of work and volunteering, access to capital, and the evaluation of social utility towards social impact.This book is very widely documented and makes it a collection that can serve as a reference in their field. With a very academic style, a technical and specialized vocabulary, this book is aimed at seasoned readers.The Inter-University Network of the Social and Solidarity Economy (RIUESS) was established in the year 2000. Today, it brings together around twenty French universities around its objective: to promote training and research in the social and solidarity economy and to encourage exchanges and shared initiatives between SSE actors. This book was produced by a multidisciplinary team composed of members of the network, economists, sociologists, and a philosopher,  constituting the RIUESS-MSE collective.With contributions from Mariagrazia Cairo Crocco, Melaine Cervera, Cyrille Ferraton, Anne Fretel, Laurent Gardin, Patrick Gianfaldoni, Florence Jany-Catrice, Vincent Lhuillier, Pierre Robert, Delphine Vallade.Reading note by Sophie FRIOT

This book was published in 2024, but current parliamentary debates, steeped in ideology, make it highly relevant today. Capitalism has been left to its own devices since the 1980s, and is no longer relied upon to improve living conditions for all. Successive governments seem to have neglected social infrastructure—hospitals, schools, the justice system, etc.—either out of convenience or conviction, even though the quality of such infrastructure reflects the value that a democracy places on the lives of its citizens. Western economies in general, and ours in particular, are in the situation we are all familiar with, attempting to resolve a conflict of horizons, a concept that emerged about ten years ago to characterize the difficulties of managing energy and environmental transitions, and which can be extended to current societal transitions. The author, a renowned economist who has worked in banking and asset management, is an advocate of capitalism focused on the common good, corrected for the excesses that are making the world increasingly threatening. The book is therefore a plea for our societies to use the drivers of capitalism to invest once again in “improving people’s lives; and this cannot be taken for granted.” While democracy has made capitalism a factor for progress, laissez-faire has led to numerous excesses; these are the themes of the first two chapters. This is followed by two illustrations that “globalization has not made the Earth flatter” and that “the end of the USSR did not mark the end of history.” Finally, the last two ideas developed are injunctions to “take back the helm” and “look more closely at the future”; ideas that have been repeated by many, but which are treated with finesse, outside the paths usually taken by columnists… because Anton BRENDER is not a columnist but a field economist who, with his experience and his personal and professional cultures, tackles what are sometimes taken as clichés such as: forgetting GDP? Getting into more debt? Absurd budgetary rules? the challenge of sustainability, placing greater value on the future, democracy under threat, the influence of platforms, the weakening of traditional information channels, etc. The approach is therefore to objectify these themes by attempting to distinguish between fact and opinion, reality and perception. The conclusion is that global chaos, climate change, and the increasingly acute tensions manifesting themselves in our country make the need for action urgent. Rebuilding the foundations of solidarity that underpin a democratic society should be a priority for governments…and citizens. This requires consolidating the physical and social infrastructure that reflects the value a society places on the life of each individual. It may also involve considering a redistribution of income to reduce some of the inequalities naturally generated by capitalism; and above all, it requires the mobilization of as many people as possible. Only widespread awareness can make this happen. The current debates on whether to increase taxes to finance increased spending—or vice versa—without any consideration for the future of society show that we are still a long way from this. There are 18 months to go before the next presidential election, and this awareness, leading to the setting of a course that is acceptable to the majority. It is not much time ! Dominique CHESNEAU

In his latest book, Mathieu Couttenier strives “to shed light on the incentives that fuel violence and to illuminate the policies likely to mitigate its effects”. In particular, he questions the rather circular or cyclical nature of violence. His observations cover the latest internal civil conflicts in countries mainly in Africa, the Maghreb, South America and Asia, as well as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the war between Israel and Palestine. The book is organized in three parts, devoted respectively to the determinants of violence (poverty, inequalities, the monopolization of natural resources, personal ambitions, etc.), then to the mechanisms favoring conflicts, and finally, to the policies and mechanisms implemented to put an end to them. The originality of the book lies in the analysis of the role of the media and social networks, in the triggering and continuation of conflicts, as well as in the sometimes indirect or implicit dimensions of their implications: psychological traumae, impacts on families, tearing of the social fabric, destruction of value chains, decline in the development of a country. The author reveals the complexity of mediation between belligerents, the diversity of forms of intervention by third countries and international organizations (UN, NATO, etc.), the inequality of sanctions imposed on those responsible for abuses, the hidden nature of war financed by industrial groups or neighboring states, the variety of possible aids for reconstruction, etc. The author draws his sources from the many academic research works and journalistic testimonies devoted to armed conflicts, and he illustrates his analyses with quotations denouncing the misdeeds of violence, particularly collective violence. It provides useful keys to understanding, both theoretical and practical, current conflicts. The author is a professor at the ENS Lyon and director of research in economics on governance, inequality and conflict (CERGIC). Jean – Jacques Pluchart