Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis paper provides an introduction to this Special Issue on the United Nations report Our Common Agenda. The report, for which the Secretary‐General consulted widely, contains around 90 proposals and recommendations, propagating solutions at the national, regional and global levels and across four broad areas: (i) renewed solidarity between peoples and future generations in order to strengthen social cohesion, (ii) a new social contract anchored in human rights; (iii) better management of critical global commons; and (iv) global public goods that deliver equitably and sustainably for all. With some exceptions, the Our Common Agenda report has been very well received both internationally and by UN Member States. The members of the Una Europa Global Governance Research Group wrote a number of brief articles commenting on diverse salient aspects of the Our Common Agenda OCA report and its implementation, and how these touch on a variety of issues of global governance, which are being presented in this Special Issue. This introduction provides an overview of the topics that are covered and their main findings.

We offer a general‐equilibrium analysis of Brexit incorporating the state‐of‐the‐art differences in productivity and firms' selection within manufacturing sectors à la Melitz (Econometrica, 2003, 71, 1695) and multinationals in services. Our results suggest that trade, output and average productivity diminish across most sectors in the UK and the Rest of the European Union (REU), as well as GDP, welfare, wages and capital remuneration. However, the UK loses more due to the missing preferential access to the huge EU market. Significant welfare losses along the extensive margin occur in the UK due to the lost imported varieties produced by highly productive European firms. These cannot be compensated by the new varieties of less productive domestic firms that enter the British market due to increased protectionism and reduced import competition. In addition, the emergence of barriers against multinationals, which is often ignored in previous studies, explains approximately one third of the negative effect in both the UK and REU. Furthermore, we show that the Brexit impact is about only half if we do not include both foreign direct investment barriers and Melitz structure. Thus, previous studies without these important model features would underestimate the Brexit impact significantly. ; ISSN:0378-5920 ; ISSN:1467-9701

We offer a general-equilibrium analysis of Brexit incorporating the state-of-the-art differences in productivity and firms' selection within manufacturing sectors à la Melitz (Econometrica, 2003, 71, 1695) and multinationals in services. Our results suggest that trade, output and average productivity diminish across most sectors in the UK and the Rest of the European Union (REU), as well as GDP, welfare, wages and capital remuneration. However, the UK loses more due to the missing preferential access to the huge EU market. Significant welfare losses along the extensive margin occur in the UK due to the lost imported varieties produced by highly productive European firms. These cannot be compensated by the new varieties of less productive domestic firms that enter the British market due to increased protectionism and reduced import competition. In addition, the emergence of barriers against multinationals, which is often ignored in previous studies, explains approximately one third of the negative effect in both the UK and REU. Furthermore, we show that the Brexit impact is about only half if we do not include both foreign direct investment barriers and Melitz structure. Thus, previous studies without these important model features would underestimate the Brexit impact significantly.

AbstractOne of the targets of the UN's Our Common Agenda Report is placing women at the centre. In this paper, we propose a three‐step methodology for the analysis of gender inequality: (1) we explain how gender gaps are measured and present several indicators of inequality and discrimination against women. Several international institutions are paying close attention to the topic, and we present their main indexes; (2) we show the different ways that exist to identify the main factors that explain these gaps, in order to propose gender policies; (3) we evaluate the success of real policies in reducing the gender gaps. Discrimination against women exists, but the extent of 'real' gender discrimination is quite complex to identify. We describe some techniques for carefully dealing with this issue. It is clear that real discrimination should be eradicated and that the elimination of gender gaps requires the consideration of different social dimensions: work, occupation, income, poverty, social exclusion, education, health, civil rights, political empowerment, participation in culture, relations within the family, co‐responsibility in childcare and reconciliation of professional life, different forms of violence against women, among others.