The Economic and Labour Relations Review

23/09/2026

📢 Call for Submissions –

The Economic & Labour Relations Review (ELRR) invites submissions for upcoming issues from scholars working at the intersection of economics, labour relations, and public policy.

We publish original, peer-reviewed research that critically engages with contemporary economic and social challenges. ELRR encourages multidisciplinary contributions that assess and question dominant economic orthodoxies, explore heterodox approaches—particularly post-Keynesian perspectives—and advance debates around justice, rights, equality, and power in the world of work.

All submissions are subject to double-blind peer review. We welcome both theoretical and empirical contributions, including comparative studies and critical reflections that push the boundaries of established discourse.

🔍 Journal Scope: Economics | Labour Relations | Social & Economic Policy | Employment Studies | Industrial Relations | Public Policy

📅 Submission Deadlines: Rolling (Accepted year-round)

🔗 Submit your manuscript and review author guidelines via our website: https://lnkd.in/g5j_P3KQ

21/09/2026

🤖 Can AI really solve the productivity problem?

Generative AI is widely promoted as the next major driver of productivity growth but, will the gains actually be shared with workers?

In ‘Can the Fourth Industrial Revolution solve the productivity problem?’, Gerbrand Tholen and Andrew Westwood challenge the assumption that AI-driven productivity growth will automatically deliver broad economic benefits. They examine how corporate behaviour, the changing position of knowledge workers and uneven effects across organisations could determine who ultimately captures the gains.

The authors argue that technology alone cannot guarantee shared prosperity: institutions and policy will play a crucial role in ensuring productivity gains translate into better jobs, meaningful work and fairer rewards.

Read the article: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-economic-and-labour-relations-review/article/can-the-fourth-industrial-revolution-solve-the-productivity-problem/4E331102F29E648132A3C431A5BD1413?utm_source=SFMC&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Article&utm_campaign=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Articles&WT.mc_id=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Articles

14/09/2026

📊 Is the public sector really dragging down Australia’s living standards?

Australia’s productivity debate has increasingly focused on low productivity growth in the non-market sector but, is this the right way to understand the relationship between public services, wages and living standards?

In ‘Is the public sector dragging down living standards?’, David Richardson challenges the proposition that low productivity growth in the non-market sector is responsible for weaker living standards. Revisiting an important debate about wages, productivity and income distribution, he argues that adjusting wages for lower productivity in the non-market sector can create broader economic problems.

Read the article: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-economic-and-labour-relations-review/article/is-the-public-sector-dragging-down-living-standards/999E04A996D00349F37F9166D904BF5B?utm_source=SFMC&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Article&utm_campaign=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Articles&WT.mc_id=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Articles

09/09/2026

🇦🇺 What should Australia’s industrial policy look like in a changing global economy?

The Future Made in Australia agenda marks a renewed interest in industry policy after decades in which free trade and globalisation dominated economic thinking.

In ‘What to make of Future Made in Australia: New directions in industry policy’, Jenny Stewart examines the history and rationale of industry policy in Australia, the changing international environment, and the prospects for a more strategic role for government.

With global trade becoming less predictable, what can Australia — and other small and medium-sized economies — do to harness the power of the state for future growth?

Read the article: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-economic-and-labour-relations-review/article/what-to-make-of-future-made-in-australia-new-directions-in-industry-policy/451BDC87CA2CF55B7A7D56E90D8E6FA9?utm_source=SFMC&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Article&utm_campaign=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Issues&WT.mc_id=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Issues

07/09/2026

📖 Can classical and Keynesian economics be brought together?

In his review of Tony Aspromourgos’ Nature and Economic Society: A Classical-Keynesian Synthesis, John King examines an ambitious attempt to combine the classical political economists’ approach to production and distribution with Keynesian and Kaleckian approaches to aggregate economic activity.

The book also extends this framework to consider the relationship between nature and the human economy, offering a broad perspective on economic production, distribution, growth, government, money and finance.

Read the review: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-economic-and-labour-relations-review/article/tony-aspromourgos-nature-and-economic-society-a-classicalkeynesian-synthesis-abingdon-routledge-2024-viii-178pp-isbn-9781032580289-us-4559/C07BBF4D44E89B1BE0B50684A68852B0?utm_source=SFMC&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Article&utm_campaign=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Issues&WT.mc_id=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Issues

02/09/2026

📚 What makes a good academic citation?

Citations are fundamental to scholarly research but, how much is enough? Too little can fail to acknowledge important scholarship, while too much can obscure rather than strengthen an argument.

In ‘Considering citation: Good, bad, and ugly perspectives, with a glimpse of 37(1)’, Diana Kelly explores the principles, ethical considerations and pitfalls of academic citation, including questionable and potentially fraudulent practices.

Read the article: Considering citation: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-economic-and-labour-relations-review/article/considering-citation-good-bad-and-ugly-perspectives-with-a-glimpse-of-371/D24F067F61321DCBA8E546F13E9EB866?utm_source=SFMC&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Article&utm_campaign=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Issues&WT.mc_id=New%20Cambridge%20Alert%20-%20Issues

01/09/2026

Our September Article of the Month explores the intersection of LGBTQ+ identity, non-standard employment and workplace well-being.

In ‘The “double whammy”: Associations between LGBTQ+ identity, non-standard employment and workplace well-being’, Christine Ablaza, Francisco Perales and Nicki Elkin examine how insecure employment arrangements may compound workplace disadvantage for LGBTQ+ workers, drawing on data from the 2024 Australian Workplace Equality Index (AWEI) Employee Survey.

Learn more - https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-economic-and-labour-relations-review/article/double-whammy-associations-between-lgbtq-identity-nonstandard-employment-and-workplace-wellbeing/525F05CAD083656FC811C6767BCD0FCA

16/07/2026

Top economists urge leaders to address AI risks like large-scale job displacement.

16/07/2026

01/06/2026

🌱 ELRR Article of the Month

What does a truly just transition look like? In this thought-provoking article, Francesco Laruffa and Bénédicte Zimmermann challenge narrow, growth-driven approaches to climate transition and argue for frameworks that place justice, democracy and collective wellbeing at the centre of environmental change.

Exploring the intersections of ecological sustainability, labour and social justice, this timely contribution asks critical questions about who benefits, who bears the costs, and how more inclusive futures can be built.

➡️ READ IT HERE - https://lnkd.in/gB66bnY9