Présentation et informations pratiques

« We are pacifist today with so much strength of conviction that, if the economic internationalist could win this point, he would soon recapture our support. But it does not now seem obvious that a great concentration of national effort on the capture of foreign trade, that the penetration of a country's economic structure by the resources and the influence of foreign capitalists, that a close
dependence of our own economic life on the fluctuating economic policies of foreign countries, are safeguards and assurances of international peace »
John Maynard Keynes, « National Self-Sufficiency », The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4, 1933

The global economic order we have known for the past 45 years is faltering. While some wanted to believe in “happy globalization” (Minc, 1993) and others thought it was “not to blame” (Krugman, 1996), these certainties, known collectively as the Washington Consensus, are crumbling under the weight of increasingly frequent financial crises, mounting macroeconomic imbalances, multiplying geopolitical unrest, the seemingly unstoppable rise of authoritarian powers, and accumulating sovereign and private debt. These blows to the old order are destabilizing the institutions of global economic governance, undermining multilateralism, and paving the way for a rise in protectionism. The rise of protectionism will undoubtedly not only have negative consequences. It may support the desire of many populations and governments to regain greater sovereignty in economic and ecological matters. This movement echoes Keynes' call for greater “national self-sufficiency” ... almost a century ago. The resurgence of protectionism raises a whole set of questions to which heterodox economists have already provided many answers, but which undoubtedly deserve to be put into perspective, criticized, updated, refined, or reformulated to reflect what is currently happening, in light of the most recent advances in institutional economics and Post-Keynesian macroeconomics.

i) Is there a body of doctrine, inherited from a long history of ideas, that could gain broad acceptance among today's critical economists and that could be expressed through a few clear statements, a few well-established precepts and recommendations on protectionism, its usefulness, and the practical ways to implement it?

ii) In particular, what are the main strategic levers that should be activated as a priority, among the four main approaches traditionally distinguished: public aid, import taxes, quotas, and local content requirements? To what extent does this choice depend on the objectives pursued (employment, trade balance, reindustrialization, social and environmental protection, innovation, technology transfer, establishment of short supply chains, etc.); the sectors of activity targeted (targeted or, on the contrary, not targeted); the size of the sovereign areas concerned; and the time horizon of the policy envisaged?

iii) Does what is referred to as the end of multilateralism add fuel to the fire of protectionist ideas? Or does it call for a reorganization of free trade at another spatial level (at the level of mega-regions or large economic and political blocs)? Does it advocate a philosophy of international trade conceived as trade between “stateless” companies, or as trade between “nations”? Can we already predict that there will be real winners and losers in this overhaul of the rules of the game, and according to what distinctive criteria and guiding principles? What could be the guiding principle behind the realignments that will take place in the international division of labor and “value chains” in this context? What changes can we expect from the strategic and geographical redeployment of large industrial firms and the growing influence of digital giants?

iv) How will goverments be able to tackle the main challenges that are reshaping their agendas: the imperative of reindustrialization, the urgency of ecological crises as well as the necessity to adapt, the strengthening of their defense capabilities? What about longterm planning, investment, long-term strategies, and the socialization of investment?

v) From a strictly macroeconomic perspective, would a deglobalized world economy, reorganized around major regional hubs, perform better in terms of employment, income, economic stability, and environmental quality than the globalized economy of the past 40 years? Would this configuration be more conducive to the overall dynamics of effective demand, a more cooperative game than in the past, paradoxically re-legitimizing certain institutions of global governance (IMF, World Bank, OECD, WTO,...)? A more equitable distribution of wealth is becoming the central concern for successfully implementing ecological transitions. Planning will have to play a major role in this. A contrario, could the retreat into a few gigantic economic empires lead to fears of a medieval regression into inter-feudal conflicts?

vi) Does this projection reveal the outlines of a new international monetary and financial order, governing new relationships between currencies, new rules for the movement of capital, and new security principles designed to regulate the activities of agents and financial markets? And what would be the desirable lines of action in these areas? Will the financialization of the economy — particularly of businesses — be affected? Where are the main risks to global financial stability (in real estate, household debt, public debt, bank balance sheets, etc.)? How can we rebuild financial systems that guarantee new monetary
and financial sovereignty?

vii) At a moment in history when the answers to all these questions remain clearly conjectural, reflecting the fact that uncertainties of all kinds dominate the picture, is it possible to outline detailed guidelines for the articulation between fiscal and monetary policies, a sort of guide for navigating rough seas, which would provide some protection from the dramatic upheavals of the global economic order?

In addition to this main theme, contributions on other recurring themes in the field of heterodoxy are also welcome:

i) In the field of the history of economic thought: works dealing with authors, schools of thought, and controversies relating to the principle of effective demand, growth, distribution, and employment from a macroeconomic perspective.

ii) In the field of institutional and organizational economics: research focusing on the history of companies and their governance models, in relation to the process of accumulation, innovation, and the social and environmental policies implemented.

iii) In the field of industrial economics: contributions that highlight pricing decisions (margins) in relation to different competition regimes, technical progress and/or changes in labor relations and the international context.

iv) In the field of finance and banking: work illustrating or explaining the growing importance of financial institutions, financial logic, and financial products in economic processes, as well as their impact on businesses, households, and governments. These contributions will be particularly appreciated if they suggest possible links with macroeconomic concerns, thereby contributing to the advancement of non-conformist thinking that breaks with the mainstream.

Instructions pour la soumission d'un court résumé d'article (max. 250 mots)

La soumission d'un court résumé d'article doit être faite sur le site du colloque, en suivant l'onglet "Nouveau dêpot", après avoir crée un compte utilisateur HAL. 

Ce court résumé doit inclure le nom des auteurs/autrices, leurs institutions d'affiliation, leurs adresses email et les codes JEL corrspondant à l'article proposé. 

Si vous souhaitez proposer une session spéciale sur un sujet qui regroupe 3 à 4 contributions, cette proposition doit être soumise sur le site du colloque en suivant l'onglet "Nouveau dêpot". Elle doit inclure un court résumé du thème de la session spéciale (max. 250 mots), le nom des contributeurs/contributrices, leurs institutions d'affiliation, leurs adresses email et les codes JEL corrspondant aux articles proposés.

Afin de faciliter l'organisation du colloque, communiquez-nous au plus tôt possible si vous souhaitez organiser une session spéciale à l'adresse email gpklille@gmail.com 

Pour toute information complémentaire, veuillez nous contacter à l'adresse gpklille@gmail.com

Dates à retenir

Date limite pour la soumission d'un court résumé : 5 janvier 2026
Début de notification d'acceptation/rejet : 19 février 2026
Date limite pour l'enregistrement anticipé : 26 mars 2026
Date limite pour l'enregistrement tardif : 11 mai 2026
Date limite pour la soumission du papier complet (optionnel) : 10 juin 2026

Frais de participation

Enregistrement anticipé : l'enregistrement anticipé ouvre le 1er mars 2026 et ferme le 26 mars 2026. Les frais d'inscription anticipée sont de 250 Euros. Les étudiants Les étudiant.es, les doctorant.es et les jeunes docteur.es sans poste peuvent bénéficier de la gratuité des frais d'inscription. Les frais d'inscription anticipée n'incluent pas le dîner de gala.

Enregistrement tardif : l'enregistrement tardif ouvre le 27 mars 2026 et ferme le 11 mai 2026. Les frais d'inscription sont de 300 euros. Les étudiant.es, les doctorant.es et les jeunes docteur.es sans poste peuvent bénéficier d'un tarif réduit de 100 euros. Les frais d'inscription tardive n'incluent pas le dîner de gala.

Publication des contributions

Le European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention (EJEEP) éditera un numéro spécial consacré au colloque. Pour ce numéro spécial, 3 à 8 papiers présentés au colloque seront selectionnés et publiés. Les modalités et les dates limite de soumission des articles pour publication dans le numéro spécial de EJEEP seront communiquées prochainement. 

Plus d'informations sur le dîner de Gala suivront

Télécharger l'appel à communication