The theory of extra surplus value (ESV) is a significant component of Marx's surplus value theory, though its source has been the subject of ongoing debate. This article reviews and clarifies Marx's central arguments, demonstrating that the generation of ESV does not rely on changes in labor complexity and that the difference between individual value and social value is unrelated to value transfer. With this clarification, the paper proceeds to reconstruct Marx's theory of ESV， offering a new interpretation that resolves key ambiguities in existing scholarship. ESV is generated when individual firms innovate their production processes, reducing individual labor time and thereby obtaining surplus value beyond the average level. The benchmark for comparison is the surplus value that advanced firms can achieve under the prevailing social rate of surplus value. As a property derived from its definition，ESV is equal to the difference between a commodity's sale price and its individual value, which can be further divided into two components: the difference between the sale price and the social value, and the difference between the social value and the individual value. The first component arises from the transfer of value between sectors, while the second stems from value created by the firm's own labor. If a firm's technological innovation does not affect the social value of the commodity, ESV equals the difference between social value and individual value, and is entirely derived from value creation. However, if a firm monopolizes new technology and impedes price adjustments even as the social value decreases, the ESV generated from the difference between the sale price and social value results from value transfer. 

Economic system reform has an important impact and transmission role on other reforms. The progress of major economic system reforms determines the progress of many other aspects of system reforms, and has a role in influencing the whole reform progress. Letting economic system reform play a leading role for other reforms is an inevitable requirement for liberating and developing social productive forces. Comprehensive deepening of reforms in the new era provides strong impetus for the development of new quality productive forces. Judging from China's reform process，economic system reform is a breakthrough in comprehensively deepening reform, and it also drives institutional reforms in the fields of politics, society, culture and ecological civilization. To further promote economic system reform， we must focus on properly handling the core issue of the relationship between the government and the market, put the construction of a high-level socialist market economic system in a prominent position，closely focus on the main tasks of reform to scientifically plan and pragmatically advance them, and lead reforms in comprehensive innovation in institutional mechanisms, democracy and the rule of law, cultural system and mechanism, people's livelihood system, and ecological civilization system.

The present and the near future constitute a critical period for our endeavor to build a great country and move towards national rejuvenation on all fronts through Chinese modernization. Advancing Chinese modernization requires further deepening reform. Important arrangements for further deepening reform comprehensively to advance Chinese modernization are made at the third plenary session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. It emphasized that we should promote better adaptations of relations of production and productive forces, superstructure and economic foundation，national governance and social development， to provide strong impetus and institutional guarantee for Chinese modernization. Comprehensively deepening reform means, on the premise of adhering to the basic political and economic systems, reforming the part of the superstructure that involves the national governance system and governance capacity, and promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity to achieve a positive interaction with the economic foundation. It also means, on the premise of adhering to the basic economic system，reforming the specific forms of production relations such as institutional arrangements, institutional structures, and mechanism designs to adapt to and promote the development of productive forces. This has not only rigorous theoretical logic，profound historical logic，clear practical logic，but also increasingly clear reform roadmap and construction plan.

Isaak Illich Rubin(1886-1937) was born in Daugavspils, Latvia，on June 12,1886.In 1905，he became an active participant in the Russian revolutionary movement. He later joined the Mensheviks and was elected to their Central Committee in the autumn of 1920. He was imprisoned by the GPU in April 1923 in the round-up of Mensheviks. On his release he dropped his political work to concentrate on his academic studies and teaching.From 1926 to 1930，he was a research associate at the Marx- Engels Institute under Ryazanov, becoming one of the most influential interpreters of Marx's work. In the 1920s, he published several works, including Essays on Marx's Theory of Value，Physiocracy, A History of Economic Thought; Contemporary Economists in the West，Classics of Political Economy from the 17th to mid-19th Centuries,History of Class Struggles, and co-edited Fundamental Problems of Political Economy. His most influential work,Essays on Marx's Theory of Value, was published four times in 1923，1924，1928and 1929.The second edition in 1924 drew sharp criticism at the time，with critics arguing that it separates the form of value from the content of value. Rubin's works were rediscovered and translated into English and other languages only in the 1970s. His political economy ideas have attracted some attention in the West, and in recent years, they have also attracted increasing attention from domesticscholars. However,apart from Essays on Marx's Theory of Value published by the Central Compilation & Translation Press,there are few Chinese translations of Rubin's works in China. This is a lecture given by Isaak Illich Rubin at a meeting of the Economics Institute of the Marx-Engels Institute in May and June 1927. The lecture developed one of the main themes of Rubin's Essays on Marx's Theory of Value. This lecture was first published in Under the Banner of Marxism (Noд 3HaMeHeM Mapkch3ma)， No. 6，1927.Capital & Class translated the lecture into English in issue 2，1978，based on the German version. The main contents of this lecture are as follows:“abstract labor”and“value”are the central problems of all Marxist theories. We should investigate the question of the relationship between“labor”and“value”not only by “the analytical method"， but by “the dialectical method” as well. Marx's theory of value and money have five “basic concepts":the relations of production betweenthe commodity producers,abstract labor，value,exchange value and money. This system was only interrupted in two places, at the point where we have to move from“the relations of production”to “abstract labor”，and then again from“value”to“exchange value”. These “interruptions”disappear when we regard“abstract labor”as “labor which possesses a determined social form”，and“value”as“the unity of content and form". 

Since the reform and opening up, there are five major advancements in the Communist Party of China's understanding of the basic socialist economic system guided byDeng Xiaoping Theory, Important Thought of Three Represents,Scientific Outlook on Development，and Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with ChineseCharacteristics for a New Era. It changed from the traditional planned economy to the socialist market economy; from a pure public ownership system to public ownership as the mainstay of national economic development with other forms of ownership playing their parts; from a single distribution method of “according to one's work” to the coexistence of multiple distribution methods; from the establishment of the principle of distribution according to contribution to the refinement and enactment of the system; from the basic economic system in the initial stage of socialism to the comprehensive upgradation of the basic socialist economic system. This series of cognitive changes not only promoted the reform of China's economic institution and basic economic system，but also opened up a new realm for the development of contemporary Chinese Marxism.

 Economic fluctuation and growth are the core problem of economic subject to create value and develop productivity. This paper mainly aims at the problem of economic fluctuation and growth. At the theoretical level, a two-sector model of national economic
reproduction is established from the perspective of Marx's reproduction theory, and a quantitative index system of actual output level is constructed from the perspective of Marx-Shaikh based on Shaikh's principle of Maximum Expanded Reproduction. This article finds that when the distribution ratio of input and output of the two sectors is coordinated, the output of the two sectors will be improved. The profit rates of the departments are similar，the profits of the department are transformed into the average profit of the society, and the actual output level reaches the peak. At the empirical level, the actual output levels of China，the United States，the United Kingdom, Japan and France are measured by input-output table and other data, and it is found that China has sufficient production input and stable capital input for a long time, and is currently in a new stage of improving the actual output level driven by innovation and development. It is found that on the basis of moderate investment and accumulation and stable real economy, we must go through a transition period from multi-level production to the elimination of backward production capacity and the development of high-level economy, to guide production factors transfer to high-quality industries.

Cultivating and developing new quality productive forces is in line with the requirements of the new round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial transformation， and digital intelligence has become the future trend of scientific and technological innovation and industrial upgrading. It is the key interest and logical necessity of cultivating and developing new quality productive forces to promote the transformation of digital intelligence of productivity and to use digital intelligence technology to promote the cross-integration of various industries and thus to generate new industries and new business forms. Focusing on the goal of transforming China's economy from high-speed growth to high-quality development and cultivating and developing new quality productive forces with digital intelligence, it is necessary to focus on the digital intelligence of the industrial system that promotes the organic integration of agriculture, industry and service industries; the traditional production factor system is promoted by the embedment and reorganization of new technologies such as digitization, informatization and intelligentization. By improving the digital skills and intelligent application ability of workers, the digital intelligence of labor subjects can be enhanced. Only by adhering to the construction of modern industrial system with digitalized production mode, promoting the adjustment and optimization of production relations with digitalized production factors, and cultivating digitalized new quality talents guided by improving innovation ability， can we deepen the digitalized driving direction of cultivating and developing new quality productive forces.

This paper focuses on reviewing Professor Hong Yuanpeng's academic achievements. Professor Hong Yuanpeng has been dedicated to the study, teaching, and dissemination of Marx's Capital for a long time. He has transformed Marx's comprehensive understanding of the political economy system into various forms of academic achievements, fully showcasing the theoretical charm of Marxist political economy. Professor Hong Yuanpeng， based on the soil of China's economic life, applies Marx's political economy theory system to explore the theoretical logic of fundamental principles such as value and price, and answers many theoretical and practical problems in economic reform practice. He has made unremitting efforts to enhance the ability to interpret Marxist political economy theory. He was the first to systematically propose and construct the theoretical system of social interests, making outstanding contributions to the development of China's socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics.

New quality productive forces is an innovative category of the sinicization and modernization of Marxist political economy. It has given the Marxist theory of productivity a new connotation and practical requirement of the times. This is reflected in the following: it is a brand-new summary and explanation of the new trends,characteristics and laws of the development of productive forces in Chinese society at the new stage, a new interpretation of the core position and important role of scientific and technological innovation in promoting the development of the productive forces at the new stage and its laws, a new overview of the qualitative changes in the factors of productive forces and their combinations in the new era, a new overview of the new trends in the path of productive forces' development and their modes of conversion, and a new explanation of the unique connotations of comprehensively deepening reforms to accelerate the formation of a new type of production relations that are compatible with new qualitative productivity. It has made innovative contributions to promoting the sinicization and modernization development of Marx's productivity theory.In the critical period of comprehensively advancing the construction of a powerful nation and national rejuvenation by means of Chinese modernization， it is necessary to adhere to the guidance of new quality productive forces to deeply promote reform and innovation, and continuously inject strong momentum into Chinese modernization.

The theory of the articulation of modes of production proposed by John G. Taylor et al. suggests that human society often has multiple production modes simultaneously, and the modes of articulation among them affects the development process of the economy and the society. Expanding this analytical framework, we believe that the articulation of production modes is the institutional arrangement or practical process of constructing the “sum” of production modes by establishing connections among various production modes with different attributes, their economic organizations, and economic activities through various means, so as to ease potential contradictions among them. The modes of articulation among production modes can be divided into three main types: master- slave articulation，plate articulation，and integrated articulation. The different modes of articulation mean different relationships among various production modes. Various modes of production either oppose or cooperate with each other, thus forming different“ownership ecology”in the entire society. What kind of ownership ecology a
forms depends on the interaction between productive forces and production relations, economic base and superstructure. Especially, the structural influence of superstructure factors such as political power and ideology cannot be ignored. In the new journey of Chinese-style modernization, to promote the complementary advantages and common development of all kinds of ownership economies, it is necessary to systematically summarize China's historical experience in promoting the common development of multiple ownership economies since the reform and opening-up, gather broader ideological identity and social consensus for the common development of multiple ownership economies, optimize the articulation modes between various types of ownership economies, especially vigorously develop the integrated articulation,and correctly handle the relationship among the state-owned economy, the private economy and the foreign investment economy.

The state-owned economy is not only a general economic form and economic phenomenon that is common in all countries in the world, but is also of a special nature. Whether in developed or developing economies,whether in the past or at the present, the state-owned economy has played an important role in the economic and social development. China's state-owned economy has the same or similar general functions as foreign state-owned economies, and also has special functions relative to foreign state-owned economies. The functions of the state-owned economies of various countries are constantly evolving dynamically with the changes in the internal and external environment. So far， there is no consistent conclusion in the academic circles on the function of the state-owned economy, and in particular, there is a lack of a coherent theoretical explanation framework. Similar to Western countries on the whole, the basic functions of China's state-owned economy can be divided into two dimensions: guarantee and guidance. The former is a general function, and the latter is a special function, which have created the Chinese miracle. The core functions of the state-owned economy is the modernization and concretization of the main basic functions. In recent years, although the quality and competitiveness of the state-owned economy and state-owned enterprises have been continuously enhanced， there are still considerable deficiencies in leading scientific and technological innovation,the development of new productive forces, safeguarding national security,and ensuring the people's livelihood. Thus they cannot meet the requirements of Chinese-style modernization and need to be strengthened. To enhance the functions of the state-owned economy, it is necessary to adhere to the principles of hierarchical classification，marketization,and benchmarking to international standards,and achieve this goal through high-quality development, comprehensively deepening reforms, and optimizing the layout and the structure.

 Xi Jinping economic thought, as the latest achievement of the sinicization and modernization of Marxist political economy, has opened up a new realm of contemporary socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China，the “systematic economic theory”with Chinese characteristics has become the leading direction for the formation and development of Xi Jinping economic thought. It has not only forged the disciplinary identity and academic characteristics of socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics， but also laid the theoretical characteristics and academic principles of China's independent knowledge system of economics. We must adhere to the system concept, deepen system integration, strengthen the research on the system integration of Xi Jinping economic thought, and further enhance the theoretical interpretation, systematic construction, and principle extraction of Xi Jinping economic thought.

New theories are born in new practices.The new national conditions and new world conditions we live in require that political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics keep pace with the times.The development of new quality productive forces also provides technical conditions for the innovative development of political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics.Drawing on the logic system of Capital and taking the new quality productive forces as the underlying logic, this paper studies the historical evolution of political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics from five stages: theoretical tracing, theoretical reference, theoretical exploration, theoretical innovation and theoretical system innovation, to build a theoretical system with Marxist political economy as the theoretical core, the relationship between the government and the market as the basic relationship, the theory of socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics as the theoretical subject, and solving the major social contradictions and realizing the Chinese-style modernization as the goal.

The theory of new quality productive forces with Chinese characteristics contains the theoretical implication of the unity of inheritance and innovation, the epochal implication of the coherence between history and reality, and the methodological implication of the combination of theory and practice.The Marxist theory of productivity, combined with the characteristics of the times and specific practices of China's high-quality economic and social development in the new era, has led to the formation of the theory of new quality productive forces with Chinese characteristics.China's productivity development mode has gone through three stages: the traditional productivity development mode dominated by material accumulation, the crude productivity development mode prioritizing quantitative growth, and the new quality productive forces development mode oriented by high-quality development.The practical orientation of the development of new quality productive forces is to: clarify the source of productive forces, stimulate the growth of new quality productive forces by taking innovation as the main line; base the layout of the new quality productive forces industry system on the characteristics of productive factors, with quality as the key; solidify the foundation of productive forces development by promoting the sustainable development of new quality productive forces with a green tone; follow the laws of productive force movement and use new production relations as a guarantee to promote the progress of new quality productive forces.

Since the early 2010s, China's economic growth, like the dominant global trend, has been on a continuous decline, with no signs of reversal to date. Existing research on the slowdown is diverse but can ultimately be attributed to two main themes: the insufficiency of demand and the decline in profit margins. The former hinges on identifying the determinants of productive investment, while the latter concerns the distribution of economic surplus and the profit-creating capacity of productive sectors. How to assess the relative validity of these explanations and integrate them into a coherent systemic interpretation is a significant challenge both academically and in terms of policy-making. This paper attempts to dissect the theoretical logic and empirical basis of these explanations. On this basis, it further clarifies the structural and institutional conditions involved in economic performance and explores the future direction of China's economic transformation. The concluding judgment of this paper can be summarized as follows: Whether China's economy can maintain a desirable growth rate ultimately depends on the contest between two modes of economic transformation, namely the production-oriented mode and the speculation-oriented mode. This contest has been a decisive factor in global development throughout the era of globalization and has dominated the direction of China's economic transformation since the beginning of the new century, especially since the 2010s.

Production and distribution are the basic economic problems of human society, and there are three ways or bases for modern society to solve the problems of production and distribution: market logic, government logic and social logic.These three institutional logics are embedded in the evolution of the economic development mode and determine the process and results of production and distribution.Looking back on the economic development of the People's Republic of China in the past 75 years, we can find that in the three stages of economic system changes in the standing up era(1949-1978), the rich era(1979-2012), and the strong era(since 2013), the ternary logics of market incentive, government regulation and social norms evolve interactively and tend to be integrated.Practical experience shows that the single logic of the market or of the government is difficult to ease the contradiction between efficiency and fairness, and the social logic can build social consensus and better reconcile the contradiction between efficiency and fairness in terms of reform effect, so as to continuously improve the equality degree of people's participation in production and the sharing degree of development achievements.The reform of China's economic system in the new era should further promote the integration and balance of the logics of market, government and society, adhere to the organic unity of top priority and affinity to the people, achieve high-quality development that combines production growth with equitable distribution, and promote common prosperity.

The idea of“building a community with a shared future for mankind”is an important part of Xi Jinping's thought on socialism with Chinese characteristics for the new era, as well as an important part of Xi Jinping's economic thought .It takes Marx's theory of world history as an ideological resource, and is a contemporary continuation and innovative development of Marx's theory of world history.The idea of“building a community with a shared future for mankind”was put forward against the backdrop of the profound evolution of the unprecedented changes of the past century, the major adjustment of international political and economic relations, and the many difficulties faced by all mankind, such as climate change and ecological and environmental crises.“Building a community with a shared future for mankind”is a multifaceted and multisystemic process of collaboration and co-construction in international politics, economy, science and technology, as well as in social and cultural relations and interactions among people of various countries. Therefore, the idea of“building a community with a shared future for mankind”is not only the basic principle of building a new type of international political relations, but also the basis of building a new type of international economic relations, which is a brand-new theory of the world system that conforms to the law of development of human history.In the sense of Marxist political economy, “building a community with a shared future for mankind”implies a higher level of development of national productive forces, a more rational international division of labor, more harmonious international relations of production, and a fairer sharing of international surplus value among countries. The basic goal is to establish a new world economic order in which peoples of all nations work together to address the various contradictions and challenges in the process of economic development and to achieve common prosperity for all countries, large and small.

By monopolizing the energy as the condition of production, contemporary imperialism has controlled socialized mode of production and established a new form of hegemony known as energy imperialism.Energy imperialism is essentially a social form derived from the social power shaped by the mode of production and its organization, mobilization, and operation.The era-specific characteristics of energy imperialism are still in accord with the five major features of imperialism analyzed by Lenin.As a secondary driving force in social reproduction, energy embodies the logic that conditions of production alter modes of production, permeates the entire process of the production mode transformation and indicates a new direction for the evolution of production modes.Comprehensively promoting Chinese-style modernization requires strategies to address energy imperialism.This involves, on one hand, breaking the renewable conditions of energy under the logic of monopoly capital through value revolution, and on the other hand, jointly advancing the construction of a community with a shared future for mankind through the international sharing of economic surplus.

The party committee is an integral part of the corporate governance structure of an enterprise and plays a leadership role in the sustainable development of the enterprise. This paper analyzes the impact of party committee leadership on corporate ESG performance and its mechanism using data of A-share listed companies in China from 2011 to 2022. The results show that“two-way entry and cross-serving”of corporate leaders significantly improves corporate ESG performance.Mechanism analysis shows that the active implementation of national policies and the correction of managerial myopia under the leadership of Party committees are important reasons for the improvement of ESG performance.Further motivation analysis reveals that firms under the leadership of party committees improve their ESG performance for value motives rather than resource motives and compliance motives, and that firms' ESG practices can effectively improve their green development capability and reduce the risk of greenwashing.In addition, core firms under the leadership of party committees can generate significant positive ESG spillovers, which is conducive to improving the ESG performance of upstream suppliers, but not to promoting the ESG performance of downstream customers.This paper provides empirical evidence for giving full play to the political advantages of corporate governance with Chinese characteristics to promote steady improvement in corporate ESG performance and high-quality corporate development.

Under the continuous impact of the anti-globalization trend, the risk of“differentiation”and“fracture”in the global market has become increasingly prominent. The tension between the advanced capitalist countries and the increasingly strong willingness of the emerging powers to reform the existing international order has torn apart the global governance order, leading to the dilemma of the global market under the dilemma of global governance.A high-level big country market is a major strategic resource for a big country to grasp the initiative of future development in the period of turbulence and change in the world, and the logic of its transformation into economic advantage lies in the endogenous return increment mechanism established after the deepening of the division of labor and the expansion of the market scale, and then forms a comprehensive advantage that couple multiple effects of innovation incentives, economies of scale, spatial agglomeration and local market.Nowadays, China has fully equipped the conditions to use the domestic market to support the growth of the new era, and it is necessary to seek a scientific strategy to build a large market in the governance dimension and the practical dimension, and promote the strategic interaction and integration of domestic and international economic dual circulation with the development and expansion of the domestic market.

In capitalist countries, military expenditure is not only crucial for national security, but also an important component of national finances, which has a significant impact on the capitalist economy.The Marxist school is the earliest to conduct relevant research and has developed a series of findings from the perspectives of profit rates decline and value realization.The Neoclassical school primarily conducts research from the supply side, with the emergence of the Feder-Ram Model and the Augmented Solow Growth Model furthering research towards normalization and empirical analysis.The Keynesian school focuses on the demand side, exploring the role of military expenditure in creating additional demand, influencing resource redistribution, indirectly impacting the civilian economy and creating additional savings.This paper reviews relevant literature, outlines the development paths, theoretical innovations, and representative achievements of each school, and identifies cross-school similarities, differences, and future research directions.

In the history of economic thought, Marx and Keynes hold fundamentally divergent views on the impact of technological progress on working hours.Marx argues that technological progress does not necessarily reduce working hours, whereas Keynes optimistically contends that it significantly shortens them.This paper examines the“Marx-Keynes”proposition on working hours through theoretical analysis based on political economy and empirical testing using econometric methods.Employing data of China's A-share listed companies, the China Family Panel Studies(CFPS) data, and census data, this paper constructs a unique industry-level panel dataset on working hours spanning 2001-2017.Taking the 2008 financial crisis as an exogenous shock to demand, a difference-in-differences model is used to identify the causal relationship between the organic composition of capital and working hours.The empirical results reveal that industries with higher organic compositions of capital are more likely to increase working hours in response to demand shocks.Specifically, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, industries with higher organic compositions of capital experienced an average increase of 0.8 hours in working hours compared to those with lower compositions. These findings remain robust after a series of robustness checks, including alternative measurements, controlling for other policy interventions, and placebo tests. Furthermore, the paper identifies profitability, market power, and the industrial reserve army as three mechanisms through which the organic composition of capital affects working hours. The empirical evidence supports Marx's theoretical hypothesis rather than Keynes'.

The core functions of the state economy include three dimensions, namely the productive function of providing products and services, the institutional function reflecting the socialist mode of production, and the governance function as a tool for national macroeconomic governance. Under market economy conditions, due to the indirect social nature of production by state-owned enterprises, there can be conflicts between national macro-governance goals and corporate business objectives. The mechanisms for realizing these three functions are different and not coordinated, necessitating further reforms to the internal relationship between government and enterprises within the state economy to establish a mechanism for the coordination of multiple functions of the state economy. The classified management of state-owned enterprises is a preliminary exploration in this regard, but the issues have not been fully resolved. The reform needs to elevate from managing enterprises to managing capital, and the classified management of state capital and the pilot program for state capital investment trust funds should be put on the agenda.

The calculation of ownership structure has always been a difficult problem and the results obtained by some researchers are also controversial, due to the incomplete and discontinuous statistical data related to China's ownership structure. In recent years, the scope and types of relevant statistical data have changed, and most of the calculation methods proposed by the researchers in the past are no longer applicable or still have room for optimization. This article optimizes and improves the calculation method of ownership structure, based on the paid-in capital data and registered capital data from the national economic census and other relevant yearbooks. The ownership structure of China's secondary and tertiary industries from 2000 to 2018 is evaluated using the proportion of the public economy as an evaluation index. It is found that the proportion of public economy in China's secondary and tertiary industries has been continuously declining since 2000, and dropped to 25.7% in 2018. The view that public economy increased faster than private economy was proved to be wrong, and it was necessary to further strengthen, optimize, and expand the public economy. State-owned enterprises are the important part of the public economy, so developing state-owned enterprise is a task which brooks no delay.

A comprehensive and systematic exploration of Marx's theory of productive forces is of great significance for advancing the theoretical and foundational research on new quality productive forces. Marx and Engels' extensive discussions on productive forces are internally logically connected. This paper combs Marx and Engels' conception and categorical system of productive forces from the dialectical relationships between material and spiritual, social and individual, subject and object, general and particular, and society and nature; summarizes and concludes Marx and Engels' thought of the social character of productive forces from the “capitalist nature” and “social essence” of productive forces in capitalist society and their inherent contradictions; and further explains Marx's thought of the intrinsic connection between the two primordial relationships, human-nature relationship and human-society relationship, and introduces and develops key categories such as secondary and tertiary relations of production, as well as derived, transferred, and non-primordial relations of production proposed by Marx. Marx and Engels' conception of productive forces holds the important theoretical value for China's current efforts to cultivate and develop new quality productive forces and to construct new-type relations of production compatible with them.

By introducing space into Marx's theory of value, this article explores the general analytical framework of Marx's spatial political economy. The production of goods and the spatial transfer of goods belong to the field of production, with the latter affecting the value of goods by influencing the social norms of their use value. After considering spatial factors, the value of goods can be divided into two parts: production value and spatial value. The competition between commodity producers, in addition to technological competition, also includes spatial competition, and the interaction between the two forms a dynamic of spatial equilibrium and imbalance. The government is the subject of spatial production, and by changing the spatial pattern, it affects the competitive behavior of producers and the market competition situation. Expanding the spatial dimension of value theory has certain theoretical significance and practical value for developing Marxist spatial political economics and explaining spatial economic phenomena.

After the end of World War I, despite the economic downturn in the UK, the UK Treasury still adhered to the principle of sound fiscal budgeting and, in response to the challenges posed by the Liberal Party's public works plan, put forward the “Treasury View” centered on the “crowding out” theory. Keynes challenged the laissez-faire policy upheld by the British Treasury, opposing the gold standard system and advocating for active government management of the economy. By developing the theory of effective demand and incorporating government budgets into national income decisions, Keynes achieved a transformation from the balanced budget principle to the full employment budget principle. Keynes’ fiscal theory revolutionizes the traditional concept of sound fiscal budgeting and has important reference significance for the construction of China's current fiscal system and the formulation of fiscal policies.

数字经济的快速发展与全球格局的深刻变迁，正在重塑资本主义的生产方式与社会关系结构。数字技术与货币金融的深度融合推动了资本积累方式的重构，同时也对分配机制带来了新的影响与挑战，进一步加剧了资本主义经济的内在矛盾。2024年，政治经济学界的研究聚焦于资本主义经济在货币金融、分配机制、危机理论与数字经济等方面的演化特征及其内在矛盾，取得了丰硕成果，进一步拓展了对当代资本主义经济运行逻辑、危机本质及发展路径的理解。

2024年7月18日召开的中国共产党第二十届中央委员会第三次全体会议通过了《中共中央关于进一步全面深化改革推进中国式现代化的决定》（以下简称《决定》），对进一步全面深化改革需要重点应对的十四个方面工作进行了全面部署，其中第一项就是“构建高水平社会主义市场经济体制”。社会主义市场经济是中国共产党在团结带领全国各族人民进行社会主义建设的过程中确立的改革目标和基本框架，是我们党的重大理论创新，是马克思主义中国化时代化的重要成果。社会主义市场经济理论有其独特的演进脉络，也必须不断经受中国经济发展和社会建设的实践检验，在实践中不断确证自己的真理性，在实践中不断取得理论的新发展。站在中华民族伟大复兴战略全局和世界百年未有之大变局两个大局的交汇口，如何更好构建高水平社会主义市场经济体制，打好进一步全面深化改革的攻坚战，为中国式现代化提供制度保障和经济动能，是亟待学界深化研究的重大理论和实践问题。

党的二十届三中全会明确指出，“加快构建促进数字经济发展体制机制，完善促进数字产业化和产业数字化政策体系”。数字经济的兴起不仅是数据资源积累和数字技术革新的必然产物，也是生产力发展与全球经济结构转型的重要体现。在马克思主义政治经济学视域下，数字经济作为继农业经济、工业经济之后的新型经济形态，本质上是以数据资源为核心要素，由数字技术进步和平台化发展引领的生产力革命，并推动生产关系发生相适应的系统性变革。随着人工智能为代表的数字技术持续创新，数字经济发展已经成为各国在全球经济竞争中重新定位的重要契机。

在2024年度的国外政治经济学研究新进展报告当中，我们将以劳动价值论与剩余价值论、政治经济学的制度分析、劳动时间、土地、地租与食利者、政治经济学的定量经验分析方法五个专题对英语世界的政治经济学研究进行介绍。相比于往年的报告，2024年度的报告在选题和写作思路方面进行了一些调整，其核心在于缩小专题的讨论范围和报告总体的话题覆盖面。之所以进行这样的调整，原因在于一方面国内政治经济学界已经对国外政治经济学的研究有了非常多的了解和接触，这表现为政治经济学英文文献在国内引用数量的提高和中国学者在政治经济学的外文期刊发文数量的持续上升，全景式介绍的必要性正在下降；另一方面，过去一年中不同领域的英文政治经济学文献发表是不平衡的，全景式的介绍必然遇到一些领域新进展乏善可陈而另一些领域文献汗牛充栋、难窥全豹的问题。因此，在新一年度的报告中，课题组选择2024年一些关注度较高、讨论较为集中、进展较为丰富且对国内政治经济学研究借鉴意义较大的专题进行讨论。专题的题目也不再主要使用代表研究领域的范畴，而是更多地采取以问题为导向的方式。

In response to the debate and disagreement in the academic community over the logical mainline of China’s independent economic knowledge system, this article returns to Marx’s basic idea of establishing the logical mainline of political economy, and clarifies the basic principle that the establishment of the logical mainline of political economy must be consistent with the research method, research object, and research assumptions of political economy. The logical mainline of Marx’s political economy is the liberation of the proletariat, which includes ideological liberation, political liberation, economic liberation, free and comprehensive development, and it has stages. This provides the basic principles of Marxism for the establishment of the logical mainline of China’s independent economic knowledge system. The logical mainline of China’s independent economic knowledge system is the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, which has gone through different stages of development, demonstrating the innovative development of our Party’s advancement of the sinicization and modernization of the logical mainline of Marx’s political economy.

2024 is the crucial year for achieving the goals and tasks set out in the 14th Five-year Plan. China actively responds to the impacts brought about by changes in the domestic and international environment, solidly promotes high-quality development, and promotes the economic recovery and improvement. New quality productive forces have been cultivated in accordance with local conditions, and new industries, new business forms and new models have emerged one after another. To specifically address the difficulties and challenges faced by China’s economic operation and deepen the understanding of the regularity of economic development, the political economic circles in China have carried out systematic and in-depth research and achieved a series of representative results. 

全面建设社会主义现代化国家，最艰巨最繁重的任务仍然在农村。推进中国式现代化，必须加快推进乡村全面振兴，坚持城乡融合发展。2024年3月20日，习近平总书记主持召开新时代推动中部地区崛起座谈会指出，坚持城乡融合发展，扎实推进乡村全面振兴。党的二十届三中全会提出“城乡融合发展是中国式现代化的必然要求”，将城乡融合发展上升到党和国家事业发展的全新战略高度。2024年中央经济工作会议提出“统筹推进新型城镇化和乡村全面振兴，促进城乡融合发展”。2024年政治经济学界乃至整个经济学界围绕乡村振兴与城乡融合发展进行深入研究，取得了一些新进展。