Suchergebnisse

The objective of the study was to analyze the importance of banking in Mexico. The banking system in Mexico is the result of a complex transformation of processes as deregulation, expansion, crisis, nationalization, foreign ownership and privatization. In 1983, commercial banks were transformed into national credit; later, in 1985 with the purpose of rationalize and optimize their operations, their number decreased. Since 1988 the country began a process of economic and financial reform. Gradually, selective credit drawers were removed and interest rates (Solis, 1997) were liberalized. Between 1991 and 1992, the 18 banks which had hitherto belonged to the government were divested. For some experts, the privatization mechanism was inappropriate because it benefited brokerage firms that, in some cases, were property of former directors of the commercial banks. In addition, the newly privatized banks took advantage of the inadequate regulation and supervision to foster an excessive increase in credit (above the real dynamics of the economy), joined to the precarious risk assessment practices and technological underdevelopment in the banking sector at that time (De la Cruz and Alcántara, 2011). Two years later, in 1994, capital outflows and currency imbalances were consequence of political events that contaminated the economic environment at the time, which significantly reduced the market liquidity. This was worsened by the issuance of short-term government bonds denominated in dollars and free convertibility, which caused a rapid decline of international reserves and an economic crisis. Both the crisis and the devaluation of the currency (in December 1994) increased the bank nonperforming loans (NPLs). In addition, rising interest rates and higher unemployment, exacerbated the breach of obligations of debtors, causing serious problems in the banking sector, forcing the government to speed up the entry of foreign capital into the sector with the aim to find alternative sources of funding (Clavellina, 2013).

Government subsidies directed to particular groups of farmers, selected producers or selected geographical areas have their particular effect on those areas but really do not change tendencies on a complete sector. That is, sectorial programs have a systemic effect and particular programs have a non systemic effect affecting only products or regions but never the complete sector. The main variable that captures this effect is the per capita Gross National Product, which is an approximation to aggregated product over economical active population. It was found that the main support program to producers in Mexico has changed the structure in the use of production resources such as labour, capital, technology, land and water particularly among producers of medium and high incomes and with a moderate or low impact among those producers with low incomes.

The objective of the study was to analyze the importance of banking in Mexico. The banking system in Mexico is the result of a complex transformation of processes as deregulation, expansion, crisis, nationalization, foreign ownership and privatization. In 1983, commercial banks were transformed into national credit; later, in 1985 with the purpose of rationalize and optimize their operations, their number decreased. Since 1988 the country began a process of economic and financial reform. Gradually, selective credit drawers were removed and interest rates (Solis, 1997) were liberalized. Between 1991 and 1992, the 18 banks which had hitherto belonged to the government were divested. For some experts, the privatization mechanism was inappropriate because it benefited brokerage firms that, in some cases, were property of former directors of the commercial banks. In addition, the newly privatized banks took advantage of the inadequate regulation and supervision to foster an excessive increase in credit (above the real dynamics of the economy), joined to the precarious risk assessment practices and technological underdevelopment in the banking sector at that time (De la Cruz and Alcántara, 2011). Two years later, in 1994, capital outflows and currency imbalances were consequence of political events that contaminated the economic environment at the time, which significantly reduced the market liquidity. This was worsened by the issuance of short-term government bonds denominated in dollars and free convertibility, which caused a rapid decline of international reserves and an economic crisis. Both the crisis and the devaluation of the currency (in December 1994) increased the bank nonperforming loans (NPLs). In addition, rising interest rates and higher unemployment, exacerbated the breach of obligations of debtors, causing serious problems in the banking sector, forcing the government to speed up the entry of foreign capital into the sector with the aim to find alternative sources of funding (Clavellina, 2013).

Currently there are 1200 million people worldwide living in extreme poverty. For these circumstances, tourism has seen as an opportunity to alleviate poverty in rural communities. There are many features of tourism as an economic activity that makes it particularly interesting for low-income countries and disadvantaged communities that people inhabit; thus, the objective of this study was to analyze through the review of national and global case study reports, if tourism impacts in reducing poverty in rural communities where the activity occurs. Among the main findings, which are consistent with the approaches of Gascon (2011), is that the focus of tourism benefits a small group of the community, the rest gets marginal income that does not allow them to think of tourism as an option to improve their conditions, seeing migration as a more profitable opportunity. Thus, the approach pro-poor tourism (PPT) did not fight for equality, and may even represent problems for a portion of the population, as poverty and marginalization depends less on the amount of income earned but on the position of the individual within the social structure. As noted by theorists of "social exclusion", a person or social group may own or have access to the means to survive, but being marginalized in the fields of political, cultural and economic decision.