A model by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel (1991) using workers' and consumers' councils, balanced job complexes, pay for effort and sacrifice, and iterative participatory planning instead of markets or central planning. Not implemented economy-wide.
Albert and Hahnel set out the model in The Political Economy of Participatory Economics (Princeton University Press, 1991); Albert later popularised it as 'parecon'. Workers' and consumers' councils decide by self-management. Jobs are combined into 'balanced job complexes' so that empowering and rote tasks are shared, which the authors say prevents a 'coordinator class' monopolising conceptual work. Income reflects duration, intensity and onerousness of work. Production and consumption are coordinated by annual participatory planning: councils propose and revise plans through iterations, with a facilitation board. Albert has said no full implementation exists, only partial implementations of partial aspects. Objections: whether iterative planning is workable and whether it hides authority; Hahnel cites simulations suggesting it is practical.
No economy-wide implementation. Albert points to partial implementations of partial aspects; critics question the planning procedure, while Hahnel cites simulation results suggesting annual planning rounds are practical.
Albert and Hahnel's model combines workers' and consumers' councils, balanced job complexes, remuneration for effort and sacrifice, and participatory planning as an alternative to both markets and central planning.[1][2]
Albert acknowledged in 2018 that a full implementation of an economy with parecon's features does not exist, citing only partial implementations of partial aspects.[1]
Dapprich argues that standard justifications for democracy do not support citizens voting on concrete economic plans, and that citizens should instead choose general planning procedures. Hahnel replies that simulations suggest the iterative annual plan is practical.[1][2]