Suchergebnisse

Studi ini akan mengukur indikator hutang luar negeri yang berkelanjutan di tujuh negara ASEAN selama 1996-2017 menggunakan indicator-based model. Uji kointegrasi panel diterapkan untuk mengestimasi dampak indikator makroekonomi dan kelembagaan terhadap hutang luar negeri yang berkelanjutan. Terdapat dua indikator hutang luar negeri yang berkelanjutan, yaitu: (a) EDS1 – yang menunjukkan tingkat pertumbuhan hutang luar negeri lebih rendah dibandingkan dengan pertumbuhan GDP, dan (b) EDS2 – yang menunjukkan pertumbuahn GDP lebih besar dibandingkan dengan tingkat bunga riil. Temuan-temuan studi menunjukkan bahwa indikator makroekonomi dan beberapa indikator kelembagaan berdampak signifikan terhadap EDS1 sedangkan makroekonomi indikator – seperti pertumbuhan GDP, inflasi dan FDI inflows – dan satu indikator kelembagaan – seperti efektivitas pemerintah – berdampak signifikan terhadap EDS2 dalam jangka pendek. Speed of adjustment berdampak signifikan terhadap hutang luar negeri yang berkelanjutan dalam jangka pendek. Lebih lanjut, kointegrasi panel menjelaskan bahwa dalam jangka panjang indikator makroekonomi (kecuali nilai tukar) dan kelembagaan berdampak signifikan terhadap hutang luar negeri yang berkelanjutan. Hasil studi berkontribusi terhadap kebijakan pemerintah seperti kebijakan pengelolaan hutang luar negeri, pro-pertumbuhan, pro-investasi, stabilitas harga dan peningkatan kualitas kelembagaan baik pada tingkat sebuah negara dan tingkat ASEAN. ; This study attempts to assess indicators of external debt sustainability in seven selected ASEAN countries during 1996-2017 using an indicator-based model. Panel cointegration test was also employed to examine the impact of macroeconomic indicators and institutions on external debt sustainability. There are two indicators of external debt sustainability, namely: (a) EDS1—in which the growth of the external debt should be lower than the growth of GDP, and (b) EDS2—in which the growth of GDP should be greater than the real interest rate. The findings show that macroeconomic indicators and some institutional indicators impact significantly on EDS1 while the macroeconomic indicators—such as, GDP growth, inflation and FDI inflows—and a single indicator of institutions, i.e., government effectiveness, give a significant impact on EDS2 in the short-run. The speed of adjustment indicates a significant impact on external debt sustainability in the short-run. Furthermore, panel cointegration explains that in the long-run macroeconomic indicators (exclude exchange rate) and institutions have a significant effect on the external debt sustainability. The results of the study aim to contribute to governments policies in the form of an external debt management policy, pro-growth, pro-investment, price stability and institutional quality improvement at both country and ASEAN levels.

[Extract] This chapter explores PISA for Schools, an instrument developed by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), in collaboration with a diverse array of (largely US-based) partner organizations, including philanthropic foundations, not-for-profit agencies and commercial edu-businesses. PISA for Schools, a school-based variant of the OECD's influential Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test, not only assesses school performance in reading, mathematics and science against international schooling systems, but also promotes examples of what the OECD presents as best practices from notionally world-class schooling systems (i.e., as measured by PISA), as well as the policy expertise of the OECD itself. This arguably reflects the expanding scope, scale and explanatory power of the OECD's education policy work (Sellar and Lingard 2014), which helps extend the relevance of PISA beyond national policymakers and political leaders into decidedly more local schooling spaces (i.e., schools and schooling districts). Specifically, my focus here is how PISA for Schools helps to constitute new spaces and relations of global education policymaking, and how these emergent relational or topological, spatialities enable the OECD to influence how schooling is locally thought and practiced.

This article presents an original dataset of direct public funding (DPF) of political parties across 27 post-communist regimes from the outset of transition until 2020. It represents the first systematic, and detailed account of the actual level of DPF provided to parties outside established democracies in terms of geographical and temporal coverage. The dataset has a panel format and includes information on DPF per registered voter and cast ballot separately and in aggregate for more than 800 country-year observations and more than 200 election campaigns. The analysis unveils substantial cross-national and within-country variation in the level of DPF, as well as between statutory and election financing. Despite an increasing reliance of political parties on the state, no pattern exists regarding the dynamics of access and distribution rules. It also highlights the limitations and risks entailed by the extensive use of various proxies such as dichotomous indicators, composite regulatory indexes, or perception-based measures that do not capture cross-national and within-country variation either in DPF or other dimensions of political financing regime.