Suchergebnisse

It is widely acknowledge that financial constraints are the most visible problems of the SMEs. So through this paper we propose to analyze the main sources of financing that SMEs use to conducttheir business. And, from these sources, we should focus on the ways of financing offered by credit institutions. Thus, we will identify the main sources of financing available to SMEs and offered by creditinstitutions. Banks are increasingly seeking to become facilitators and partners with their SME clients. In other words, they try to offer a broader range of products, better service quality and better prices. Through this paper we will see if the bank offers are truly advantageous for SMEs.

The evolution of the Western world has drawn on theoretical structures of classical and neoclassical liberalism for its explanatory support and sources of inspiration for centuries. Against this ideological background, institutionalists aim at showing that growth is a process of transformation, a double change: an economic and an institutional one. In this analysis, our purpose is to highlight the importance of informal institutional arrangements and their quality in explaining the disparities of revenues and developments between countries. In our approach, we will consider several indicators meant to highlight various aspects of research. The approach proposed is a transversal-comparative one and static methods pertain to uni- and multivariate analysis. The results obtained suggest the existence of major differences within the Central and East European area as far as informal institutions are concerned; moreover, the analysis conducted confirms the existence of a significant relation between the level of development and the structure of informal arrangements such as: trust level, bribe culture and corruption control.

van Vliet O, Been J, Caminada K, Goudswaard K. Pension reform and income inequality among older people in 15 European countriesThe ageing of populations and hampering of economic growth have increased pressure on public finances in many advanced capitalist societies. Consequently, governments have adopted pension reforms in order to relieve pressure on public finances. These reforms have contributed to a relative shift from public to private pension schemes. As private social security plans are generally less redistributive than public social security, it can be hypothesised that the privatisation of pension plans has led to higher levels of income inequality among older people. This study contributes to the income inequality and pension literature by empirically analysing the distributional effects of shifts from public to private pension provision in 15 European countries for the period 1995–2007. We do not find evidence that shifts from public to private pension provision lead to higher levels of income inequality or poverty among older people. The results appear to be robust for a wide range of econometric specifications.

Abstract Climate justice is a concept with many different and competing interpretations. It has salience at intra-country, inter-country and intergenerational levels of climate politics. While inter-country climate justice has long been on the agenda of United Nations climate negotiations, the intra-country and intergenerational aspects of climate justice have assumed new prominence in many countries in recent years, as the economic consequences of mitigation became felt and transnational activism highlighted youth concerns. The diverse elements of and approaches to climate justice have this in common: realising them requires massive financial interventions and reforms. This article examines the still emerging frameworks to finance climate justice in two of the jurisdictions most important to the global response to climate change: the European Union and the People's Republic of China. The EU and China have in common that they are both on the front line of financial innovation to respond to climate change. They are utilising similar tools of systemic financial intervention in order to transition financing to climate-friendly investment, in the first case domestically, but with clear implications for global financial markets. However, the EU and China are utilising climate financing mechanisms in the context of very different prevailing perspectives on climate justice. This article interrogates the relationship between these different perspectives on climate justice and the distribution, scale and pace of climate finance. The article also observes that while the EU incorporated climate justice considerations in its economic responses to the COVID-19 pandemic with a recovery package prioritising climate action, China did not take the opportunity to foster a 'green recovery'.

AbstractClimate justice is a concept with many different and competing interpretations. It has salience at intra-country, inter-country and intergenerational levels of climate politics. While inter-country climate justice has long been on the agenda of United Nations climate negotiations, the intra-country and intergenerational aspects of climate justice have assumed new prominence in many countries in recent years, as the economic consequences of mitigation became felt and transnational activism highlighted youth concerns. The diverse elements of and approaches to climate justice have this in common: realising them requires massive financial interventions and reforms. This article examines the still emerging frameworks to finance climate justice in two of the jurisdictions most important to the global response to climate change: the European Union and the People's Republic of China. The EU and China have in common that they are both on the front line of financial innovation to respond to climate change. They are utilising similar tools of systemic financial intervention in order to transition financing to climate-friendly investment, in the first case domestically, but with clear implications for global financial markets. However, the EU and China are utilising climate financing mechanisms in the context of very different prevailing perspectives on climate justice. This article interrogates the relationship between these different perspectives on climate justice and the distribution, scale and pace of climate finance. The article also observes that while the EU incorporated climate justice considerations in its economic responses to the COVID-19 pandemic with a recovery package prioritising climate action, China did not take the opportunity to foster a 'green recovery'.

Climate justice is a concept with many different and competing interpretations. It has salience at intra-country, inter-country and intergenerational levels of climate politics. While inter-country climate justice has long been on the agenda of United Nations climate negotiations, the intra-country and intergenerational aspects of climate justice have assumed new prominence in many countries in recent years, as the economic consequences of mitigation became felt and transnational activism highlighted youth concerns. The diverse elements of and approaches to climate justice have this in common: realising them requires massive financial interventions and reforms. This article examines the still emerging frameworks to finance climate justice in two of the jurisdictions most important to the global response to climate change: the European Union and the People's Republic of China. The EU and China have in common that they are both on the front line of financial innovation to respond to climate change. They are utilising similar tools of systemic financial intervention in order to transition financing to climate-friendly investment, in the first case domestically, but with clear implications for global financial markets. However, the EU and China are utilising climate financing mechanisms in the context of very different prevailing perspectives on climate justice. This article interrogates the relationship between these different perspectives on climate justice and the distribution, scale and pace of climate finance. The article also observes that while the EU incorporated climate justice considerations in its economic responses to the COVID-19 pandemic with a recovery package prioritising climate action, China did not take the opportunity to foster a 'green recovery'.

Multiple studies have shown that Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has boosted the growth of the global economy and improved the quality of life. At present, a significant proportion of innovations and new patents are held by companies operating in the ICT sector. This study has two primary aims. The first of them is an analytical comparison of industrial investments in research and development (R&D) in ICT-related companies in various countries from the European Union. The second is to examine the relationship between these investments and each country's digital performance illustrated by the Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI). The main contribution of this paper is a proposal of a means to determining the quantitative relationship between R&D and DESI as well as the identification of the most important DESI component. The author focuses on the largest R&D investors from a list of 1,000 companies, created on the basis of data published by the Economics of Industrial Research and Innovation (IRI), covering the years 2013–2019. Both variables (DESI and R&D) have a clear joint group structure found by Ward's hierarchical clustering. Furthermore, an exponential law was identified predicting an increase of 18% in R&D expenditure when a 1 percentage point growth in DESI is observed. Among all the components of DESI, the applied random forest model proves human capital is the most important factor attracting R&D investments. Moreover, a separate analysis of R&D relating to the analysed companies showed a growing trend in R&D investments with its predicted value reaching over 46 billion euro in 2021.