Encuesta sobre remesas 2008 y medio ambiente
In: Cuadernos de trabajo sobre migración 26
1111 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Cuadernos de trabajo sobre migración 26
In: Denktraditionen im Dialog: Studien zur Befreiung und Interkulturalität 28
Developing States have contracted many debts; especially since the early 1980s; with creditors. These can be either States or international financial institutions. However; whoever the public debtor is; the latter will intervene more or less directly; increasingly becoming an interlocutor in any attempt to renegotiate or even totally pay the debt itself. This ubiquity arises many questions about its purpose and nature. This is particularly true of the political regimes of indebted states. Indeed; the democratization of these states has become both a means and an end for financial institutions; as the Initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries. Therefore; the question is whether the payment is possible or an illusion.
BASE
Les Etats en développement ont consenti de nombreuses dettes, surtout depuis le début des années 1980, à l'égard des créanciers publics. Ceuxci peuvent être soit des Etats soit des Institutions Financières Internationales. Cela étant, quelque soit ce débiteur public, ces dernières vont intervenir de manière plus ou moins directe, en devenant progressivement des interlocuteurs incontournables de toute tentative de renégociation, voire d'annulation de la dite dette. Cette omniprésence n'est pas sans susciter de nombreuses interrogations quant à son objet et sa nature. C'est particulièrement le cas de la nature politique des régimes des Etats endettés. En effet, la démocratisation de ces Etats est devenue, de manière discutable, à la fois un moyen et une finalité de l'intervention des Institutions Financières, comme le montre l'Initiative Pour les Pays Pauvres Très Endettés. Dès lors, la question est de savoir si l'annulation totale est envisageable ou une chimère? DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22518/16578953.739
BASE
In: Regional Economic Outlook
The main focus of this report is the outlook for the region in the face of the downturn now projected for the U.S. economy and the continuing risks that affect the global outlook. Overall the region is better placed than in the past to navigate the current financial turbulence, given reduced vulnerabilities and stronger policy frameworks. Nonetheless, the report points to risks that the global financial stress could curtail capital flows to the region and world commodity prices could fall more than expected. There are also risks arising from rising inflation and rapid private credit growth in
In: Americas barometer = Barómetro de las Américas
The paper suggests a conceptual framework for analyzing the relationship between democracy and economic growth based on the international dimension. In essence, democracy positively effects economic growth in a given country when international actors seek to promote democracy in that country by punishing violations of democratic norms with economic sanctions. The paper specifies conditions under which violation of democratic norms gets punished with economic sanctions. First, foreign actors must have an interest in defending democracy in a given country. Second, the costs of defending democracy must not outweigh its benefits. Finally, economic sanctions must be employed as a tool for the defense of democracy. Furthermore, factors that affect the negative impact of economic sanctions on economic growth in the 'target' country are specified in the paper. They are as follows: economic openness of the 'target' country, extent of economic interdependence with sanctioning countries, as well as the structure of the economy and opportunities to diversify economic relations with other foreign actors. Besides, the impact of sanctions on growth depends on the duration of their application. Further, the paper illustrates the logic of the conceptual framework with the empirical example of Latin America. During the Cold War, democracies in the region did not face any economic advantages with regard to international factors. Latin America's Cold War history was highly influenced by the strategic struggle between the US and the Soviet Union. For the US, the main purpose in the region was to carry out the policy of containment of communism. This meant that certain undemocratic but friendly regimes were often supported, while hostile but democratic ones were undermined. The situation changed cardinally after the Cold War ended. When the strategic threat of communism disappeared, the US changed its policy focus from containment of communism to the promotion and defense of democracies. Moreover, Latin America experienced intensive processes of democratization and economic liberalization. This created conditions for the collective system of defense of democracy in the region. Certain factors contributed to the potential impact of economic sanctions in the region in the 1990s. Economic liberalization and higher economic openness made countries more vulnerable to potential sanctions. Furthermore, Latin American countries had high levels of economic interdependence with the US, the EU and other regional democracies, all of which were ready to defend democratic systems. Finally, the disintegration of the Soviet Union and disappearance of non-democracies in the region highly reduced opportunities for economic diversification in the case of economic sanctions. In Latin America in the 1990s, every violation of procedural democratic norms was met with economic sanctions which had negative effect on economic growth in the violating country. These cases were Haiti (1991), Peru (1992) and Guatemala (1993). In the case of Paraguay (1996), the threat of economic sanctions was one of the factors that helped to preserve democratic system in the country. This means that the analysis of the relationship between political regime type and economic growth in Latin America in the 1990s is incomplete and potentially incorrect, if international factors are not taken into account. Finally, the paper gives suggestions for further research, in particular hinting to the possible structural global shift in the democracy-growth relationship in post-Cold War environment. International factors provide a possible explanation why empirically democracies tend to grow faster than autocracies after the end of the Cold War
BASE
The paper suggests a conceptual framework for analyzing the relationship between democracy and economic growth based on the international dimension. In essence, democracy positively effects economic growth in a given country when international actors seek to promote democracy in that country by punishing violations of democratic norms with economic sanctions. The paper specifies conditions under which violation of democratic norms gets punished with economic sanctions. First, foreign actors must have an interest in defending democracy in a given country. Second, the costs of defending democracy must not outweigh its benefits. Finally, economic sanctions must be employed as a tool for the defense of democracy. Furthermore, factors that affect the negative impact of economic sanctions on economic growth in the 'target' country are specified in the paper. They are as follows: economic openness of the 'target' country, extent of economic interdependence with sanctioning countries, as well as the structure of the economy and opportunities to diversify economic relations with other foreign actors. Besides, the impact of sanctions on growth depends on the duration of their application. Further, the paper illustrates the logic of the conceptual framework with the empirical example of Latin America. During the Cold War, democracies in the region did not face any economic advantages with regard to international factors. Latin America's Cold War history was highly influenced by the strategic struggle between the US and the Soviet Union. For the US, the main purpose in the region was to carry out the policy of containment of communism. This meant that certain undemocratic but friendly regimes were often supported, while hostile but democratic ones were undermined. The situation changed cardinally after the Cold War ended. When the strategic threat of communism disappeared, the US changed its policy focus from containment of communism to the promotion and defense of democracies. Moreover, Latin America experienced intensive processes of democratization and economic liberalization. This created conditions for the collective system of defense of democracy in the region. Certain factors contributed to the potential impact of economic sanctions in the region in the 1990s. Economic liberalization and higher economic openness made countries more vulnerable to potential sanctions. Furthermore, Latin American countries had high levels of economic interdependence with the US, the EU and other regional democracies, all of which were ready to defend democratic systems. Finally, the disintegration of the Soviet Union and disappearance of non-democracies in the region highly reduced opportunities for economic diversification in the case of economic sanctions. In Latin America in the 1990s, every violation of procedural democratic norms was met with economic sanctions which had negative effect on economic growth in the violating country. These cases were Haiti (1991), Peru (1992) and Guatemala (1993). In the case of Paraguay (1996), the threat of economic sanctions was one of the factors that helped to preserve democratic system in the country. This means that the analysis of the relationship between political regime type and economic growth in Latin America in the 1990s is incomplete and potentially incorrect, if international factors are not taken into account. Finally, the paper gives suggestions for further research, in particular hinting to the possible structural global shift in the democracy-growth relationship in post-Cold War environment. International factors provide a possible explanation why empirically democracies tend to grow faster than autocracies after the end of the Cold War
BASE
Le développement durable est un concept politique qui voit le jour au terme des «trentes glorieuses», c'est-à-dire après une longue période d'essor socioéconomique (1945-1975) synonyme de croissance élevée, de plein emploi et de niveau de vie élevé. Les questions environnementales apparaissent dès lors comme l'autre face de la monnaie. Le développement durable s'est imposé comme un enjeu majeur du XXIème siècle. Présenté comme une solution aux problèmes auxquels est confronté l'humanité, le développement durable continue à constituer une énigme: comment est-il possible de croître, d'améliorer le bien être social de la population mondiale, de lutter contre les inégalités sociales tout en sauvegardant la dynamique de la biosphère? Faut-il avoir confiance dans le capitalisme et dans la régulation par les prix ou, au contraire, faut-il imposer des règles pour limiter les effets néfastes du capitalisme? S'il en est ainsi, cette législation doit-elle être élaborée par les acteurs publics ou privés? La réponse à ces questions suppose de s'attarder sur le débat international sur la notion de développement durable. ; El desarrollo sostenible es un concepto político forjado al finalizar los «treinta gloriosos», es decir después de un largo periodo de desarrollo socioeconómico (1945-1975) sinónimo de alto crecimiento, de pleno empleo y de elevado nivel de vida. Las cuestiones medioambientales aparecen entonces como la otra cara de la moneda. El desarrollo sostenible se impone como el reto fundamental del siglo XXI. Presentado como la solución a todos los problemas a los que se enfrenta la humanidad, el desarrollo sostenible sigue siendo un enigma: ¿Cómo se puede crecer, aumentar el bienestar de la población mundial, luchar contra las desigualdades sociales y salvaguardar la dinámica de la biosfera? ¿Hay que confiar en el capitalismo y en la regulación por los precios o, por el contrario, es preciso imponer nuevas normas para limitar los efectos del capitalismo? Si así es, ¿esta normativa debe ser elaborada por actores ...
BASE
El desarrollo sostenible es un concepto político forjado al finalizar los «treinta gloriosos», es decir después de un largo periodo de desarrollo socioeconómico (1945-1975) sinónimo de alto crecimiento, de pleno empleo y de elevado nivel de vida. Las cuestiones medioambientales aparecen entonces como la otra cara de la moneda. El desarrollo sostenible se impone como el reto fundamental del siglo XXI. Presentado como la solución a todos los problemas a los que se enfrenta la humanidad, el desarrollo sostenible sigue siendo un enigma: ¿Cómo se puede crecer, aumentar el bienestar de la población mundial, luchar contra las desigualdades sociales y salvaguardar la dinámica de la biosfera? ¿Hay que confiar en el capitalismo y en la regulación por los precios o, por el contrario, es preciso imponer nuevas normas para limitar los efectos del capitalismo? Si así es, ¿esta normativa debe ser elaborada por actores públicos o privados? Para contestar a estas preguntas es imprescindible detenerse en la historia del debate internacional sobre la noción de desarrollo sostenible. ; Le développement durable est un concept politique qui voit le jour au terme des «trentes glorieuses», c'est-à-dire après une longue période d'essor socioéconomique (1945-1975) synonyme de croissance élevée, de plein emploi et de niveau de vie élevé. Les questions environnementales apparaissent dès lors comme l'autre face de la monnaie. Le développement durable s'est imposé comme un enjeu majeur du XXIème siècle. Présenté comme une solution aux problèmes auxquels est confronté l'humanité, le développement durable continue à constituer une énigme: comment est-il possible de croître, d'améliorer le bien être social de la population mondiale, de lutter contre les inégalités sociales tout en sauvegardant la dynamique de la biosphère? Faut-il avoir confiance dans le capitalisme et dans la régulation par les prix ou, au contraire, faut-il imposer des règles pour limiter les effets néfastes du capitalisme? S'il en est ainsi, cette législation doit-elle être élaborée par les acteurs publics ou privés? La réponse à ces questions suppose de s'attarder sur le débat international sur la notion de développement durable.
BASE
In: Monumenta iuris canonici
In: Series C, Subsidia 13