Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Alternativ können Sie versuchen, selbst über Ihren lokalen Bibliothekskatalog auf das gewünschte Dokument zuzugreifen.
Bei Zugriffsproblemen kontaktieren Sie uns gern.
60 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: The Role of Blue Carbon in Climate Change Mitigation and Carbon Stock Conservation, by Nathalie Hilmi, Ralph Chami, Michael D. Sutherland, Jason M. Hall-Spencer, Lara Lebleu, Maria Belen Benitez, and Lisa A. Levin, Frontiers in Climate, Vol 3, pp. 1-18, 2021.
SSRN
SSRN
SSRN
In: Economica, Band 65, Heft 260, S. 557-580
ISSN: 1468-0335
The paper introduces labour supply considerations and labour earnings uncertainty into a parent–child framework in the presence of 'merit goods'. I investigate the implications of various parental bequest rules on the effort decisions of the offspring, where the parent cannot perfectly observe her child's market activities. The asymmetry in information and preferences gives rise to a moral hazard problem, and as a result the parent may not fully insure her child because the source of risk is not entirely exogenous. In this case, optimal parental transfers are shown to be state‐contingent. Moreover, the child's effort is higher in the case with a merit good and parental transfers than in the case without a merit good.Goods are not only economic commodities but vehicles and instruments for realities of another order: influence, power, sympathy, status, emotion; and the skillful game of exchange consists of a complex totality of maneuvers, conscious or unconscious, in order to gain security and to fortify one's self against risks incurred through alliances and rivalry.Levi‐Strauss, The Principle of Reciprocity
In: IMF Working Paper, S. 1-36
SSRN
In: IMF Working Paper, S. 1-26
SSRN
In: Journal of economics and business, Band 62, Heft 3, S. 161-175
ISSN: 0148-6195
Cover; Contents; 1 Introduction; 2 Literature review; 3 Empirical assessment; 3.1 Data and methodology; 3.2 Labor demand: Unemployment and remittances; 3.3 Labor supply: Labor force participation and remittances; 3.4 Wages and inequality; 3.4.1 Do remittances lift wages?; 3.4.2 Remittances and the labor income share; 3.4.3 How does inequality evolve?; 3.4.4 Do remittances increase informality?; 3.5 Sectoral shifts; 3.6 Regional variation; 3.7 Remittances in fragile states; 4 Conclusion; 5 Appendix; 5.1 Summary statistics; 5.2 Regional country coverage; List of Tables.
In: IMF Working Papers
A large theoretical and empirical literature has focused on the impact of financial deepening on economic growth throughout the world. This paper contributes to the literature by investigating whether this impact differs across regions, income levels, and types of economy. Using a rich dataset for 150 countries for the period 1975?2005, dynamic panel estimation results suggest that the beneficial effect of financial deepening on economic growth in fact displays measurable heterogeneity; it is generally smaller in oil exporting countries; in certain regions, such as the Middle East and North Af
In: IMF Working Papers
In: IMF working paper WP/09/91
Remittance flows appear to be falling worldwide for the first time in decades as a result of the ongoing financial turmoil. It is suspected that the drop in remittance income into developing and emerging markets will have a destabilizing effect on these economies. The paper estimates the impact of remittances on output stability for countries that are dependent on these income flows. Using a sample of 70 countries, including 16 advanced economies and 54 developing countries, we find robust evidence that remittances have a negative effect on output growth volatility of recipient countries. This
The EU approved the first biosimilar drug in 2006. By 2017, the EU had authorized the highest number of biosimilars worldwide, acquiring considerable experience in their use and safety. In May 2019, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) search engine showed 54 authorized biosimilars. Biosimilars reduce public expenditure; however, the discussion about their potential disadvantages is still ongoing. Each country adopts different regulations on the interchangeability, switching, and substitution of a reference medicine by its biosimilar, since the EMA does not regulate this issue. Additionally, each nation has a unique reimbursement system, which results in significant differences in patients' access to biosimilars. The importance of securing a higher availability of these cheaper versions of biological drugs is well-recognized. The better the access to these biosimilars is, the lower the overall drug expenditure and need for rationing would be, and therefore the better treatment results. The aim of this paper is to compare selected aspects of reimbursement and access to the EMA authorized biosimilar medicines in two countries – France and Poland. The stated drug policy goal of both countries is to significantly improve biosimilar implementation in the coming years. The research is based on an analysis of four main sources: the EMA biosimilars database, the Polish reimbursement list published by the Polish Ministry of Health, and two French reimbursement databases published by the French Ministry of Health. An additional literature review was conducted. The expected results concentrate on differences in the number of reimbursed biosimilars, the average time between EMA authorization and country reimbursement decision date, and the availability of biosimilars registered outside of the centralized (EMA) procedure. These findings could identify areas of improvement and help with discussions on how to optimize the reach of biosimilars, as well as improve French-Polish collaboration on this matter. ; Pierwszy lek biopodobny został zarejestrowany już w 2006 r. Od tego czasu, EMA zdobyła znaczne doświadczenie w ich wykorzystaniu oraz tworzeniu odpowiednich standardów bezpieczeństwa. W maju 2019 r., wyszukiwarka znajdująca się na oficjalnej stronie EMA, pokazała 54 unikatowe leki biopodobne zarejestrowane przez tę instytucję. Substancje biopodobne efektywnie zmniejszają wydatki publiczne, jednak dyskusja na temat ich potencjalnych wad wciąż trwa. Ponieważ EMA nie reguluje tego zagadnienia, każdy kraj w Europie może przyjmować inne przepisy dotyczące zastępowalności, zamiany i zamienności leku referencyjnego przez odpowiadający mu biosymilar. Ponadto każdy kraj ma unikalny system refundacji, który powoduje znaczne różnice w dostępie pacjentów do leków biopodobnych. Potrzeba i korzyści związane ze zwiększeniem dostępności biosymilarów są dobrze rozpoznane przez decydentów i promowane przez wiele europejskich państw. Im lepszy dostęp do tych leków, tym niższe całkowite wydatki na leki i mniejsza potrzeba ich reglamentacji, a zatem lepsze wyniki leczenia. Celem niniejszej publikacji jest porównanie wybranych aspektów refundacji i dostępu leków biopodobnych zatwierdzonych przez EMA w dwóch krajach – Francji i Polsce. W obu omawianych krajach, decydenci postawili sobie jako cel zintensyfikowanie wykorzystania biosymilarów w kolejnych latach. Francja została wybrana jako komparator do polskich standardów jako przykład bogatszego i bardziej rozwiniętego kraju europejskiego. Przeprowadzone badania opierały się na analizie czterech głównych źródeł: bazy danych EMA, polskiej listy refundacyjnej opublikowanej przez polskie Ministerstwo Zdrowia oraz dwóch francuskich baz danych refundacyjnych opublikowanych przez francuskie Ministerstwo Zdrowia. Dodatkowo przeprowadzono przegląd literatury. Otrzymane wyniki koncentrują się na różnicach w liczbie refundowanych leków biopodobnych, średnim czasie między rejestracją EMA a datą rozpoczęcia refundacji oraz dostępności leków biopodobnych zarejestrowanych poza procedurą scentralizowaną (EMA). Wyniki mogą pomóc w identyfikacji potencjalnych obszarów do poprawy, a także wesprzeć dyskusję na temat optymalizacji dostępu do leków biopodobnych. Jest to również dodatkowy krok w stronę francusko-polskiej współpracy w zakresie biosymilarów.
BASE
The EU approved the first biosimilar drug in 2006. By 2017, the EU had authorized the highest number of biosimilars worldwide, acquiring considerable experience in their use and safety. In May 2019, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) search engine showed 54 authorized biosimilars. Biosimilars reduce public expenditure; however, the discussion about their potential disadvantages is still ongoing. Each country adopts different regulations on the interchangeability, switching, and substitution of a reference medicine by its biosimilar, since the EMA does not regulate this issue. Additionally, each nation has a unique reimbursement system, which results in significant differences in patients' access to biosimilars. The importance of securing a higher availability of these cheaper versions of biological drugs is well-recognized. The better the access to these biosimilars is, the lower the overall drug expenditure and need for rationing would be, and therefore the better treatment results. The aim of this paper is to compare selected aspects of reimbursement and access to the EMA authorized biosimilar medicines in two countries - France and Poland. The stated drug policy goal of both countries is to significantly improve biosimilar implementation in the coming years. The research is based on an analysis of four main sources: the EMA biosimilars database, the Polish reimbursement list published by the Polish Ministry of Health, and two French reimbursement databases published by the French Ministry of Health. An additional literature review was conducted. The expected results concentrate on differences in the number of reimbursed biosimilars, the average time between EMA authorization and country reimbursement decision date, and the availability of biosimilars registered outside of the centralized (EMA) procedure. These findings could identify areas of improvement and help with discussions on how to optimize the reach of biosimilars, as well as improve French-Polish collaboration on this matter.
BASE