This research systematically reviews the relationship between populism and economic policies, analyzing their impact on state development and growth. It is the first study to comprehensively examine the interaction between these two concepts through a systematic literature review. The review process adhered to the PRISMA protocol, utilizing the Scopus, EBSCO, and Web of Science databases, covering the period from 2012 to 2024. The findings reveal a deep interconnection between populism and economic policies, with significant implications for governance and socioeconomic well-being. The review identifies that neoliberal populism combines pro-corporate elements with populist rhetoric, favoring economic elites while presenting itself as beneficial for the “people.” Additionally, it underscores that neoliberal globalization has facilitated market liberalization but also increased inequality and undermined national sovereignty. The review concludes that while populism may offer quick fixes to immediate economic issues, its simplistic and polarizing approaches can be counterproductive in the long term. Thus, there is a critical need to reevaluate and reformulate economic and governance policies to balance global economic integration with the protection of citizens’ rights and well-being.

1. Alexandro, R., & Basrowi. (2024). The influence of macroeconomic infrastructure on supply chain smoothness and national competitiveness and its implications on a country’s economic growth: Evidence from BRICS countries. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 12(1), 167-180. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.uscm.2023.10.007
2. Anwar, S. U., Yuan, P. Z., Wuyi, Z., et al. (2024). Nexus among the perceived infrastructural, social, economic, and environmental impact of CPEC: A case of Pakistan. Heliyon, 10(13), e33355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33355
3. Arès, M., & Bernard C. (2021). From populist rhetoric to economic pragmatism President Trump’s trade policy (French). Etudes Internationales. 52(1/2): 75–98. doi: https://doi.org/10.7202/1086930ar.
4. Arzo, S., & Hong, M. (2024). Resilient green infrastructure: Navigating environmental resistance for sustainable development, social mobility in climate change policy. Heliyon, 10(13), e33524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33524
5. Ausserladscheider, V. (2024). Constructing a neoliberal exclusionary state: The role of far-right populism in economic policy change in post-war Austria. Comparative European Politics, 22(1), 128-152. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-022-00315-3
6. Bernal, D., Raheem, A. A., Inti, S., et al. (2024). Assessment of economic viability of direct current fast charging infrastructure investments for electric vehicles in the United States. Sustainability, 16(15), 6701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156701
7. Binder, N. (2023). Economic and social policy attitudes and populism: Vertical axes of conflict instead of ideological consistency. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 65(3), 505–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-023-00513-y
8. Dong, G., Witlox, F., & Bie, Y. (2024). Decentralizing e-bus charging infrastructure deployment leads to economic and environmental benefits. Communications in Transportation Research, 4, 100139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commtr.2024.100139
9. Erickson, E. D., Tominac, P. A., Ma, J., et al. (2024). Evaluating the economic and environmental benefits of deploying a national-scale, thermo-chemical plastic waste upcycling infrastructure in the United States. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 189, 108800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2024.108800
10. Favaretto, F., & Masciandaro, D. (2022). Populism, financial crises and banking policies: Economics and psychology. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 69(4), 441–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjpe.12297
11. Feldmann, M., & Popa, M. (2022). Populism and economic policy: Lessons from Central and Eastern Europe. 69(4), 441–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjpe.12297
12. Guardino, M. (2018). Neoliberal populism as hegemony: a historical-ideological analysis of US economic policy discourse. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(5), 444–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2018.1442361
13. Hunger, S., & Paxton, F. (2022). What’s in a buzzword? A systematic review of the state of populism research in political science. Political Science Research and Methods, 10(3), 617–633. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2021.44
14. Jayasuriya, S., Zhang, G., & Yang, R. J. (2024). Towards successful economic infrastructure partnership project delivery through effective stakeholder management. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 26, 101173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2024.101173
15. Lawson, J. (2022). Mounting Turbulence in Neoliberal Globalization: Political Economy, Populist Discourse, and Policy in Alberta, Canada. Social Sciences, 11(5), 221. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11050221
16. Li, M., Wang, J., Dong, Y., et al. (2024). What combinations drive the urban green infrastructure development in China’s Yangtze River Economic Belt?—An empirical study based on fs/QCA methodology. Ecological Indicators, 166, 112190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112190
17. Li, X., He, P., Liao, H., et al. (2024). Does network infrastructure construction reduce urban—rural income inequality? Based on the “Broadband China” policy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 205, 123486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123486
18. Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2015). Qualitative research synthesis. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1097/xeb.0000000000000062
19. McDonald, I. M. (2018). Policy Forum: Economics and Populism. Australian Economic Review, 51(3), 396-398. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8462.12293
20. Monteiro, S. M. M., & Fonseca, P. C. D. (2012). Credibility and populism: the economic policy of the Goulart administrations in Brazil. Estudos Econômicos (São Paulo), 42(3), 511–544. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0101-41612012000300004
21. Oleg, T. (2024). Economic populism in colour—portraits from East-Central Europe (Hungarian). Economic Review/Kozgazdasagi Szemle, 71, 344–349. https://doi.org/10.18414/KSZ.2024.3.344
22. Panigrahi, R. (2021). Economics of subsidies in a welfare state: Dynamics of populist policies and farm profitability. Global Business Review, 22(3), 705-717. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150918816902
23. Phumma, N., & Vechsuruck, T. (2022). Economic Paradigm and Demand-Side Populist Policies in Thailand. TRaNS: Trans -Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia, 10(2), 161–172. https://doi.org/10.1017/trn.2021.23
24. Rewizorski, M. (2021). Between hyperglobalization and national policy. Is there a way to mitigate populist risks for global economic governance in the post-Covid-19 world? International Organisations Research Journal, 16(2), 132–156. https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2021-02-07
25. Rosenau, J. N. (1997). Along the Domestic-Foreign Frontier: Exploring Governance in a Turbulent World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. Röth, L., Afonso, A., & Spies, D. C. (2018). The impact of Populist Radical Right Parties on socio-economic policies. European Political Science Review, 10(3), 325–350. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755773917000133
27. Schwab, K. (2016). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
28. Scott, A., & Hislop, M. (2024). What does good green and blue infrastructure policy look like: A comparative assessment of UK national planning guidance. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 99, 128440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2024.128440
29. Shahriar, M. F., Khanal, A., Khan, M. I., et al. (2024). Current status of underground hydrogen storage: Perspective from storage loss, infrastructure, economic aspects, and hydrogen economy targets. Journal of Energy Storage, 97, 112773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2024.112773
30. Sokolovska, A. M., & Kotlyarevsky, Ya. V. (2020). Scientific Discourse of Populism: Aspects of Economy and Tax Policy. Science and Innovation, 16(5), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.15407/scine16.05.036
31. Sun, J., Sun, S., Chen, B., et al. (2024). Charging change: Analysing the UK’s electric vehicle infrastructure policies and market dynamics. Energy Policy, 191, 114178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2024.114178
32. Urrútia, G., & Bonfill, X. (2010). PRISMA Statement: a proposal to improve the publication of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Spanish). Medicina Clínica, 135(11), 507–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2010.01.015
33. Usman, M., Khan, N., & Omri, A. (2024). Environmental policy stringency, ICT, and technological innovation for achieving sustainable development: Assessing the importance of governance and infrastructure. Journal of Environmental Management, 365, 121581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121581
34. Zhang, W., Burgis, C. R., Hayes, G. M., et al. (2024). Evaluation of maintenance efficiency for multiple green infrastructure designs based on water quality performance and economic costs. Ecological Engineering, 206, 107326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107326