This thesis seeks to forge a conversation between two schools of contemporary political-economic thought - degrowth and modern monetary theory. With today's urgent, multiple, and interlinked socio-ecological crises, the degrowth school of thought has become increasingly relevant. While the degrowth movement has proposed a range of policies and visions for a post-capitalist future, the structural growth imperatives of capitalist states make degrowth visions politically and economically challenging to realize. Thus far, degrowth policies that aim to weaken society's growth imperative and start building a post-capitalist society have largely been raised from the assumption that governments are limited in budgetary terms, implicitly informed by the hegemonic neoclassical economics lens. However, modern monetary theory (MMT) has recently permeated the public debate, offering an alternative take on public spending, deficits, and the government’s fiscal policy space. MMT argues that monetary sovereign states are not fiscally constrained in the same way that households and non-sovereign entities are - instead, the actual limitations to spending are the resources available to a given nation. Yet, MMT theorists give insufficient attention to ecological considerations, exemplified by their tendency to take continued economic growth for granted and overlook ecological limits, particularly from a global justice perspective. Using an Ecological Political Economy lens, this thesis initiates a conversation between the degrowth and MMT scholarship, finding that while there are both distinct tensions between the two schools, there are also many synergies and possibilities for further cross-fertilization between them within the normative goal of socio-ecological sustainability and justice.

This study explores the increasingly popular government practice of issuing green bonds. By interviewing individuals involved in the development of the Swedish green government bond issued in 2020, and examining key documents, it provides an in-depth understanding of the motivations driving a government to issue a green bond. The empirical analysis shows that the Swedish government did not issue the green bond to finance green investments, but to promote the green bond market, communicate what it was already doing in terms of environmental investments, help investors attain more sustainable portfolios and strengthen the Swedish government as a bond issuer. While the political driving force behind the green government bond was the Green Party, it was strongly supported by segments of the financial sector. The main criticism came from authorities within the government itself. Even though the proponents of the green government bond shared a concern about the environment, it was not clear how this policy would ultimately contribute to the green transition. This analysis suggest that it is more appropriate to consider it as a form of industrial policy for supporting the sustainable finance industry. This is the first in-depth case study conducted on a green government bond and thus contributes to a new research topic. It also contributes to the literature on Sustainable Finance and Investment and green bonds more generally. Furthermore, it contributes to research on government debt policy and the political economy of the green transition.

In the years immediately following the so-called “refugee crisis”, Swedish municipalities that had received many refugees improved their financial position in a quite remarkable way. Overall, 2016 might have been the best financial year ever for the municipal sector. In sharp contrast to this, 2019 saw an estimated third of all municipalities run deficits. In the public debate, this has generally been explained as a result of refugee reception and integration, which are seen as major cost factors draining the municipalities of funds. Other issues which have seen less prominence in the public debate include ongoing demographic challenges stemming from birth deficits, emigration and the continued ageing of the population. These are particularly sensitive areas in the case of smaller, rural municipalities, which generally have smaller populations than the major towns and cities. The purpose of this thesis is thus to examine how municipalities within this category have experienced refugee reception and the integration process during and in the aftermath of the refugee crisis. This has been achieved through a qualitative approach centred around thematic and qualitative content analysis frameworks. Theoretical concepts based around citizenship, integration, welfare studies and macroeconomics have been consulted. The macroeconomic framework employed stems from the heterodox school of economics, primarily centred around the school of thought known as Modern Monetary Theory. The empirical material consists of various documents published by the central government, government agencies and municipalities in order to frame what has turned out to be a contradictory and conflict-ridden account of refugee reception. During the crisis, an overwhelming majority of the Swedish municipalities saw unprecedented economic growth as a result of government spending, which has since stagnated as a result of the central government returning to its pre-crisis fiscal policy framework. In 2015, the Swedish central government turned from a relatively open asylum policy towards a very restrictive one, a shift primarily motivated with reference to financial concerns. However, this turn resulted in decreased opportunities for rural municipalities to benefit from increased migration inflows, which has turned out to be a decisive factor for economic growth and demographic sustainability. The results show that municipalities that have worked actively with integration have not only managed to accommodate the sudden needs of refugees, but actively benefitted from population growth and increased tax revenue. While the ensuing result does not necessarily advocate for increased immigration, it challenges established macroeconomic principles and the presumption that a stricter migration regime would mend the financial woes of all Swedish municipalities.

L’objection de l’exploitation est couramment soulevée lorsqu’il est question de l’implémentation d’un revenu minimum garanti. Celle-ci stipule que le versement d’un revenu minimum sans attente de contrepartie est fondamentalement injuste pour les travailleurs. Ce mémoire conteste cette objection en démontrant qu’un revenu minimum garanti ne pose pas de danger fondamental à la balance de la réciprocité. Dans le premier chapitre, la façon dont un revenu minimum garanti est financé est abordée. Il y est montré que les coûts d’un tel programme peuvent être couverts avec une taxe sur les ressources appartenant à la collectivité, sans toucher aux avoirs des travailleurs. Le second chapitre porte sur une comparaison entre le revenu minimum garanti et un revenu basé sur la participation. Elle permet de mettre en lumière les nombreux désavantages de cette deuxième option, sa mise en place risquant d’entraîner d’importants coûts financiers et humains. Le troisième chapitre s’attaque à l’objection de l’exploitation telle que formulée par Gijs van Donselaar. Les preuves qu’il fournit sont toutefois jugées insuffisantes et la thèse selon laquelle le versement d’un revenu minimum garanti encourage le parasitisme est réfutée. En ce qui concerne la perception qu’ont les travailleurs du revenu minimum garanti, il est argué qu’ils peuvent être convaincus du bien-fondé de ce programme en faisant appel à certaines valeurs centrales aux démocraties. Le dernier chapitre poursuit cette réflexion en montrant qu’un revenu minimum garanti peut être financé sans recourir à de nouvelles taxes, ce qui est expliqué en faisant appel à la théorie monétaire moderne. / The exploitation objection is commonly raised whenever the implementation of a universal basic income is mentionned. It stipulates that the payment of a minimum income without any form of obligation in return is fundamentally unfair to workers. This thesis challenges this objection and aims to show that a universal basic income does not pose any fundamental threat to the balance of reciprocity. In the first chapter, the way in which a universal basic income can be paid for is discussed. I show that such a program can be entirely funded using taxes on resources equally owned by all members of society, leaving workers’ earnings unspoiled. The second chapter focuses on a comparison between a universal basic income and a participation income. This discussion highlights the many disadvantages of the latter, the implementation of which could lead to significant financial and human costs. The third chapter tackles the exploitation objection directly, as formulated by Gijs van Donselaar. He provides insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the payment of a universal basic income encourages free-riding and his argument is therefore rejected. This leads to a closer inspection of the workers' perception of a universal basic income, which concludes that they can be convinced of the legitimacy of such program by appealing to intrinsically democratic values. The last chapter pursues this reflection by showing that a universal basic income can be implemented without resorting to new taxes, which is supported by modern monetary theory.