Ratio Working Paper No. 373: Who Wants to Work from Home? A Demographic Study of Attitudes Towards Remote Work

Circular economy debates often acknowledge material lifespans and delays, but time is usually treated as a contextual issue rather than a structural barrier. The contribution is to reframe circular economy transitions as intertemporal processes by treating time as an endogenous structural barrier. A framework is developed that classifies goods into short-, medium-, and long-lived categories, demonstrating how lagged inflows and valuation biases suppress aggregate circularity even when technology improves. By making temporal mechanisms explicit, the analysis explains why indicators remain stagnant despite policy and efficiency gains. The contribution is to introduce time as an endogenous barrier, integrating insights from environmental and resource economics into circular economy theory and showing how delayed substitution shapes both firm investment and policy outcomes.

Artificial intelligence is reshaping academia, but instead of liberating scholars, AI might keep them running faster just to stay in place. This paper theoretically explores how AI increases institutional expectations rather than reducing workload. Using a formal workload model, the study examines how automation affects academic tasks, revealing that while AI streamlines some processes, it also creates new responsibilities in research, publishing, and administration. A case study illustrates how scholars experience rising pressures to verify AI-generated work, adapt to changing publication norms, and meet intensifying institutional demands. The findings suggest that AI’s role in academia is not one only of simplification, but acceleration—a race where efficiency gains are quickly absorbed, where the pursuit of academic excellence becomes ever more demanding, and where scholars must continuously push forward, not to advance, but merely to avoid falling behind.

This report investigates the rationale, implementation challenges, and evolving global context of vertical industrial policy, with a particular focus on Sweden. Against the backdrop of recent global crises—including the 2008 financial crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and geopolitical disruptions following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine—the analysis explores how governments have re-evaluated the role of state intervention to bolster economic resilience and strategic autonomy. The report distinguishes between horizontal and vertical approaches, where vertical policy targets specific sectors or technologies considered critical for national development, such as green technology, semiconductors, and renewable energy. Drawing on economic theory and empirical evidence, the report outlines the key justifications for vertical industrial policy, including market failures, coordination problems, and the under-provision of public goods. It also addresses the limitations and risks associated with such policies, including information asymmetries, rent-seeking, and political capture. A central contribution is a decision-making framework designed to help policymakers assess when vertical industrial intervention may be justified and how it can be designed to minimize inefficiencies and unintended consequences. While the report takes a cautiously critical stance toward vertical industrial policy, it acknowledges its potential when implemented with clear objectives, regular evaluations, and institutional safeguards. The analysis highlights the need for a balanced and flexible approach, especially in the context of green transitions and geopolitical fragmentation.