Digital divides are globally recognised as a wicked problem that threatens to become the new face of inequality. They are formed by discrepancies in Internet access, digital skills, and tangible outcomes (e.g. health, economic) between populations. Previous studies indicate that Europe has an average Internet access rate of 90%, yet rarely specify for different demographics and do not report on the presence of digital skills. This exploratory analysis used the 2019 community survey on ICT usage in households and by individuals from Eurostat, which is a sample of 147,531 households and 197,631 individuals aged 16-74. The cross-country comparative analysis includes EEA and Switzerland. Data were collected between January and August 2019 and analysed between April and May 2021. Large differences in Internet access were observed (75-98%), especially between North-Western (94-98%) and South-Eastern Europe (75-87%). Young populations, high education levels, employment, and living in an urban environment appear to positively influence the development of higher digital skills. The cross-country analysis exhibits a positive correlation between high capital stock and income/earnings, and the digital skills development while showing that the internet-access price bears marginal influence over digital literacy levels. The findings suggest Europe is currently unable to host a sustainable digital society without exacerbating cross-country inequalities due to substantial differences in internet access and digital literacy. Investment in building digital capacity in the general population should be the primary objective of European countries to ensure they can benefit optimally, equitably, and sustainably from the advancements of the Digital Era.

The cornerstone of this research is the development of a model which investigates the origins of economic inequality as a derivative of labour force exploitation. The starting point of this inquiry is the theory of unequal labour exchange. The concept being empirically analysed is that the phenomenon of unequal labour exchange between Eurozone countries, arising from exploitation on a national level, plays a key role in creating inequality. The findings indicate that the differences between the capital-labour force ratio and disequilibrium prices enhanced by various levels of economic efficiencies, explain the differences in exploitation rates and arising crosscountry inequality.

The contemporary stand among scientists is that the role of the state, within mixed market economies, should be reduced to the task of ensuring the institutional framework in order to protect the free market. However, occurrences of the “too-big-to-fail” entities constitute a challenge for the government regarding its ability to manage economic affairs in the traditional manner. Given that the nature of these entities makes them relevant on the verge of their own collapse, the authors focused on the legal and economic aftermath of their failures. The authors undertook extensive research into this topic with the primary goal of arguing that government regulation, in the cases of collapsing “too-big-to-fail” entities, is necessary for achieving stability of the system. After researching of the government’s role both in theory and practice, the authors displayed the findings of the analysis of the legal possibilities within the bankruptcy law of the Republic of Croatia. The historical and practical context of the research is the implementation of the legislation in the complex case of Agrokor Group. Ultimately, the authors argue that the magnitude of the collapsing “too-big-to-fail” company requires government intervention in order to preserve economic stability in the region, in addition to maximizing social welfare.

The surprising outbreak of an anticipated virus has exposed that the profit‐centered mode of production renders a dysfunctional society, with a high incidence of pandemic‐prone diseases. Consequently, the global health crisis and subsequent economic collapse threatening the existence of billions reveal the ultimate market failure from both heterodox and radical theoretical viewpoints. The demise of markets and capitalist systems calls for a straightforward economic intervention and radical transformation of the way societal production is conceptualized. This paradigm shift must deprioritize economic growth driven by the omnipresent commodification of all social relations and must furnish a viable alternative provided by the political economy. The starting point for such fundamental change in the dominant discourse must be rooted in balancing between the needs and wants, and in creating an environment in which properly understood self‐interest would bring about a sustainable and equitable increase in societal well‐being.

No abstract