Suchergebnisse

AbstractEconomic partnership agreements (EPAs) mark a new era in economic relations between the European Union and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries that will lead to reciprocal tariff liberalization. Model‐based impact assessments have become a powerful tool in trade negotiations and mixed results are reported for ACP countries. Given their set‐up within a neoclassical framework, these models neglect important issues such as impacts on employment, macroeconomic balances and adjustment costs. The structuralist computable general equilibrium model applied in this article for three African EPA regions addresses these shortcomings and shows negative macroeconomic and distributional effects and important adjustment costs associated with employment and public revenue losses. These results highlight the importance of policy responses to deliver on promises associated with EPAs, namely sustainable economic development. More generally, they show the importance of alternative models to understand implementation challenges and facilitate broader debates about bilateral trade agreements.

This report presents the results of work package 3-4 of the SI4S project. This work package concerns the "innovation in service" aspect, i.e. what innovation in service industries is, how service firms innovate and the conditions for and impacts of the innovation process. It is a synthesis of national reports from seven European countries: Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the UK. An overview of the national reports and their specific content is included in the appendix.As the service sector counts for between 60 and 80 per cent of the GNP and the service sector may get a leading role in economic growth and development, innovation is as important in services as in manufacturing. However, innovations in services have been characterised by two facts: 1. They have not been much studied, so our understanding of them has been poor. 2. Service firms have traditionally been little innovative compared to manufacturing firms - according to the national reports even if that conclusion should be shaded by the notion that innovation in services have been for a long time underestimated because of its relatively specific nature (which means that they are often incremental solutions of specific problems). Further, their innovation process is in some respect similar to that in manufacturing, in other respect different from it. The reports also tell that service firms are improving their innovation activities, but that they need to develop organisation and management of the innovation process and the innovation awareness could still be increased in many service fields.Our understanding of, and thus research in, the service innovation processes is poor. This report is a step in the direction of a greater understanding and maybe development of operational models that firms and political authorities could use.

This report presents the results of work package 3-4 of the SI4S project. This work package concerns the "innovation in service" aspect, i.e. what innovation in service industries is, how service firms innovate and the conditions for and impacts of the innovation process. It is a synthesis of national reports from seven European countries: Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the UK. An overview of the national reports and their specific content is included in the appendix.As the service sector counts for between 60 and 80 per cent of the GNP and the service sector may get a leading role in economic growth and development, innovation is as important in services as in manufacturing. However, innovations in services have been characterised by two facts: 1. They have not been much studied, so our understanding of them has been poor. 2. Service firms have traditionally been little innovative compared to manufacturing firms - according to the national reports even if that conclusion should be shaded by the notion that innovation in services have been for a long time underestimated because of its relatively specific nature (which means that they are often incremental solutions of specific problems). Further, their innovation process is in some respect similar to that in manufacturing, in other respect different from it. The reports also tell that service firms are improving their innovation activities, but that they need to develop organisation and management of the innovation process and the innovation awareness could still be increased in many service fields.Our understanding of, and thus research in, the service innovation processes is poor. This report is a step in the direction of a greater understanding and maybe development of operational models that firms and political authorities could use.

Literaturverz. S. [178] - 191

Structural change often means major changes in organisation and job losses. The normal reaction from employees is to oppose restructuring and to want to keep things as they are. Rather than just trying to oppose the proposition from management, the union may formulate their own alternative. With two propositions on the table, the negotiations may open up to more alternatives and compromises, as well as more partners and alliances. Consumer groups, the general public and governments are more likely to be supporters if the union has its own proposition. If the unions are not in a position to present alternative solutions, they may at least be able to formulate principles for alternative solutions. Examples of this type of strategy can be found at GM Europe where the unions managed to reduce lay-offs through an alternative strategy. Similar union policies can be found in the public sector in Sweden where unions got support from customers and the general public in resisting cutbacks.