Why resource-rich countries usually end up poor Photo by Walter Astrada/AFP/Getty Images. New discoveries of natural resources in several African countries—including Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania, and Mozambique—raise an important question: Will these windfalls be a blessing that brings prosperity and hope, or a political and economic curse, as has been the case in so many countries? On average, resource-rich countries have done even more poorly than countries without resources. They have grown more slowly and with greater inequality—just the opposite of what one would expect. After all, taxing natural resources at high rates will not cause them to disappear, which means that countries whose major source of revenue is natural resources can use them to finance education, health care, development, and redistribution. Resource-rich countries tend to have strong currencies, which impede other exports; Because resource extraction often entails little job creation, unemployment rises; All over the world, countries have been doing this.
Finally, a breakthrough alternative to growth economics – the doughnut | George Monbiot | Opinion So what are we going to do about it? This is the only question worth asking. But the answers appear elusive. Faced with a multifaceted crisis – the capture of governments by billionaires and their lobbyists, extreme inequality, the rise of demagogues, above all the collapse of the living world – those to whom we look for leadership appear stunned, voiceless, clueless. Even if they had the courage to act, they have no idea what to do. The most they tend to offer is more economic growth: the fairy dust supposed to make all the bad stuff disappear. You can see the effects in a leaked memo from the UK’s Foreign Office: “Trade and growth are now priorities for all posts … work like climate change and illegal wildlife trade will be scaled down.” We cannot hope to address our predicament without a new worldview. Raworth points out that economics in the 20th century “lost the desire to articulate its goals”. The central image in mainstream economics is the circular flow diagram.
Moral Economy Project Quaternary sector of the economy The quaternary sector of the economy is a way to describe a knowledge-based part of the economy which typically includes services such as information generation and sharing, information technology, consultation, education, research and development, financial planning, and other knowledge-based services. The term has been used to describe media, culture, and government. "Quaternary sector" is a further delineation of the three-sector hypothesis of industry in the sense that the quarternary sector refers to a part of the third or tertiary sector along with the quinary economic sector. It has been argued that intellectual services is distinct enough to warrant a separate sector and not be considered merely as a part of the tertiary sector. This sector evolves in well developed countries and requires a highly educated workforce. According to some definitions, the quaternary sector includes other pure services, such as the entertainment industry. References
how to save the world Economists sound warning over carbon tax South Africa's high dependency on fossil fuel-powered energy has earned it a place among the top 20 carbon emitting countries in the world. In this year's Budget Speech, Pravin Gordhan announced the implementation of a carbon tax for 2013-2014. A draft policy is being drawn up for public comment. Carbon pricing was the topic under panel discussion at the Mail & Guardian's Critical Thinking Forum on Tuesday, hosted by the M&G and BHP Billiton. Panellists drew a direct link between a carbon tax and rising electricity costs. As Michael Rossouw, executive director of Xstrata Alloys, argued: "We have not learnt to decouple energy growth from carbon usage". Rob Jeffrey, Econometrix managing director, cited a recent study that revealed a carbon tax would reduce GDP by 3% by 2021, a sum that would amount to R88-billion. Carbon tax "South Africa makes up 1.1% of the world's carbon dioxide emissions," said Jeffrey. The shape of the future carbon tax still hangs in the balance.
Introduction What is degrowth actually about? Degrowth is a perspective and an emerging social movement, which in the last few years brought together a multitude of projects and ongoing debates around alternative economies. The main idea of degrowth is an economy and society which aims for the well-being of all and for ecological sustainability. One key conviction is that social and ecological global justice can only be achieved when the destructive economic activities of the global North are reduced. Degrowth criticises the current framework of society, which always calls for “higher, faster, further”, as well as connected phenomena like acceleration, excessive demands, marginalization and the destruction of the global ecosystem. A fundamental change in the growth-oriented methods of production and ways of life as well as an extensive cultural change are thus considered necessary. Creating a space for mutual learning These key degrowth ideas resonate with many politically active people.
The Radical Implications of a Zero Growth Economy If you read only one essay per year, it probably should be this one, and I find myself agreeing with its basic premise about the necessity of a really radical re-orientation of the totality of the current system. One seeming contradiction however, the author both rejects market forms as compatible with human survival yet points to the medieval experiences where people exchanged for ‘equal value’, i.e. without profit maximisation in mind. So a more clear recognition of non-capitalist market forms would have made the article more useful. * Article: Ted Trainer, “The radical implications of a zero growth economy”, real-world economics review, issue no. 57, 6 September 2011, pp. 71-82, The key thesis: “This society cannot be fixed; its major elements must be scrapped and replaced. Summary by Ted Trainer: The argument in this paper is that the implications of a steady-state economy have not been understood at all well, especially by its advocates. The Ecological Overshoot problem
The Emerging Fourth Sector - FourthSector.net The Three Traditional Sectors Businesses create and distribute goods and services that enhance our quality of life, promote growth, and generate prosperity. They spur innovation, reward entrepreneurial effort, provide a return on investment and constantly improve their performance responding to market feedbacks. They draw on the skills, effort and ingenuity of individual workers, and share with them the economic value created by the enterprise. Non-profit organizations give us ways to celebrate, build and protect the many human values that give rise to healthy, thriving communities. They have worked to ensure that all people have adequate necessities of life, including clean air, water, food and shelter; an equitable share of wealth and resources; and opportunity to develop their full physical, mental and spiritual potential. The Blurring of Sectoral Boundaries Businesses are dedicating more resources to delivering social and environmental benefits. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3.
Institute for Leadership and Sustainability (IFLAS) The Institute for Leadership and Sustainability (IFLAS) is emerging as a global hub of inquiry, teaching, and dialogue on enabling the transition to more fair and sustainable societies. The challenge of social, environmental and economic sustainability requires "sustainable leadership" - ways of relating that promote change that is mutually beneficial for the person, organisation, stakeholders and world at large. The scale of the sustainability challenge means it is best characterised as a "transition" from unsustainable ways of living and working. Part of the University of Cumbria Business School, our campus in the British Lake District was founded in 1892 as a place of experiential learning. With our postgraduate degrees , research programmes , inspiring events , world-class staff and associates , and global networks , we are supporting a new generation of sustainable leaders: well-balanced professionals for a better-balanced world.
Logic Freaks Economics has increasingly become an intellectual game played for its own sake and not for its practical consequences for understanding the economic world. Economists have converted the subject into a sort of social mathematics in which analytical rigour is everything and practical relevance is nothing. At least three Nobel laureates have expressed their concerns. At a very early stage Wassily Leontief in 1982 objected that models had become more important than data: “Page after page of professional economic journals are ﬁlled with mathematical formulas … Year after year, economic theorists continue to produce scores of mathematical models and to explore in great detail their formal properties; and the econometricians ﬁt algebraic functions of all possible shapes to essentially the same sets of data.” In 1997, Ronald Coase complained: “Existing economics is a theoretical system which ﬂoats in the air and which bears little relation to what happens in the real world.” Geoffrey M.
Basic Income Gathers Steam Across Europe Barcelona. In the last few months basic income—an unconditional cash payment to every member of the population—has been getting more and more attention in the media and social networks. Three items are especially interesting. First, Yanis Varoufakis, the able Greek economist, Minister for Finance in the first Syriza government and well known for his trenchant opposition to Troika austerity measures bashing the poor and already vulnerable majority of the population, has become such a media star that every time he gives an opinion on political economy, some theoretical aspect of economics or economic policy, his words are widely disseminated. Hence, his remarks on basic income, which he described as “a necessity” at the Future of Work conference in Zurich on 5 May 2016, are of no small import. In a filmed talk lasting half an hour Varoufakis, incisive and original as always, reframed the debate. Art. 110a (new) Unconditional basic income The referendum will be a cliff-hanger.
Our economic future has already been decided by the past | Business | The Observer That so much attention is paid to quarterly GDP data is not surprising. Events move fast these days, and the 24-hour news media have a voracious appetite. However, such data tell only part of the story; economies also beat to a slower rhythm. Every decade since the second world war has had its distinctive characteristics, and each has served to shape its successor. The 1950s were shaped by the re-integration of soldiers into civilian employment, reconstruction, and a more systematic management of demand. The 1960s seemed a golden era. But problems were building. The 1970s, very much the product of the decades that preceded it, were a game-changer. By the time of the second great oil shock, in 1978-79, policymakers had come to realise that they needed to reappraise their policies fundamentally: inflation control became the priority. The 1980s opened with real interest rates and unemployment soaring and output and inflation slowing. The 2000s saw matters come to a head.
Home - FourthSector.net