Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

The chapter was inadvertently published with the incorrect author name and later the same has been updated as Guidi Caterina Francesca.

Following a repetitive pattern, the world gets closer then drifts away from the complex issue of development. Development as a process is a constant presence in our lives; nevertheless, the debate surrounding it—especially with regard to its intensity and quality—is more or less articulate. How did different theories and models guide development? Looking at this topic 30 years after the end of the Cold War allows us to identify three distinct periods. The first one ranges from the end of the Cold War to the brink of the 2008–2009 economic crisis, the second covers the next decade of slow recovery, while the third, the one we are currently experiencing, is the least studied and understood of all. Before detailing these time intervals, we need to stress a fundamental fact: during the whole timespan of 30 years,

This chapter discusses the reasons why countries develop or remain poor. It examines the many reasons advanced for this and provides fresh perspectives on historical experience and the academic literature. It looks both backward over the past 70 years and forward to consider new factors shaping the development of nations and the roles of businesses, governments and individuals everywhere.

Development is a multi-dimensional, imprecise concept. Initiatives that aim to improve development attempt to address entrenched economic and social issues, increasingly through multi-component programmes, involve diverse sets of stakeholders pursuing different, sometimes competing interests, and must adapt to shifting contexts. They operate under conditions of uncertainty and complexity. Each of these factors poses challenges for measurement validity and reliability.

Based on common challenges that arose through development initiatives across a range of contexts, this paper explores four hard-to-measure dimensions of development: abstract, multi-dimensional ; challenging where there are unpredictable, sudden or frequent shifts in the environment; multiple, uncertain ; and multi-layer such as cross-sector partnerships and regional/national/subnational initiatives. These dimensions pose specific difficulties related to is measured and , the assessment of changes took place, and or what is the unit of analysis. They affect the credibility of evidence, a foundational element of evidence-informed decision-making. In addition to technical, methodological aspects, relational and political factors also have implications for measurement, even if the issue area, setting, pathway of change, and implementing structure are not inherently difficult.

In 1990, the Central and East European countries started, at approximately the same level, the race to change their economic systems from communism to capitalism, which in turn was undergoing full-fledged mutations. Almost three decades later, the gap between Romania and other ex-communist, presently EU member states, is wider. Moreover, after joining the European Union, Romania did not surmount the inequalities, so in 2016 it was a paradoxical country, enjoying the highest rate of economic growth in the UE but, at the same time, ranking systematically low in welfare and development ratings. How can one explain such a meandering evolution? How is it that a country of significant natural resources and a development level like the others’ in the region, is behind three decades later? What can still be done, in the context of a globalized economy, undergoing higher and higher and unexpected pressure, where the big tend to become ever bigger? Decision makers might answer that the economy needed to be systemically changed to contain high value, ripple-effect activities. Yet this would involve structural investments in education and R&D and attracting funds for production capacities that do not rely only on cheap labour at a time when Romania is facing a constant demographic decline, a lack of domestic capital and a deterioration in the systems of education, research and transport.

EU member states can no longer remain competitive in isolation given the current interdependencies at the international level. We analyse in this chapter the trade tendencies in the European Union, and we show the relatively large distance between Germany as the European top exporter and importer, and the following economies. We also analyse economic relations between member states that are designed to respond to non-EU challenges. We find that national member states engage in more collaborative and transnational development strategies for the coming years as a survival strategy in the current international context. Finally, we show how dependent the EU states have become on the single market by looking in depth at a case study of the United Kingdom’s trade relations.

As in the novel by William Faulkner, the perspective which is chosen to tell a story or, here, to explain a broad crisis matters a lot. The European crisis is no exception. Different views can explain the growing imbalances in the Eurozone, from the fiscal view to the labour market view. In this chapter, I critically review these separate explanations and highlight the necessity to gather the pieces to understand the full story. So doing, I can discuss the recent reforms (aggregate fiscal stance, productivity boards), the current agenda of reforms (e.g. Eurozone budget) and alternative proposals to enhance Eurozone governance, integration, and future development.

The different perspectives on inequality and its evolution in the post-crisis period have emerged in recent years. The first was introduced by Piketty (. Transl. Arthur Goldhammer. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2014), who emphasized cyclicity as an inherent feature of inequality. According to the author, inequality tends to increase or decrease according to the variations of the economy. In times of robust economic growth, the rate of return on capital (consisting of profits, dividends, interest, rents) and the labour force can both be satisfied to reasonable extents. When the rate of economic growth is low, wealth accumulates in favour of the capital instead of labour, thus increasing inequality. The second view on inequality is authored by Milanovic (. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2016), who focuses on the evolution of inequality in a global setting. He draws attention to the growing gaps between nations that pose a threat to international stability. Lastly, Graham (. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2017) contrasts objective inequality to its subjective perceptions. There are cases in which factual inequality is high, but the existence of social mobility policies based on personal merit leads to acceptance and tolerance towards inequality. The most obvious example is “the American dream”, with all the hope it encompasses. According to Graham, during the last decade, tolerance to inequality has decreased, leading to a crisis of trust.

By relating to the three aforementioned ways of understanding inequality, and other prominent views in the literature, this paper investigates through quantitative methods the different faces of inequality within Romania, with an emphasis on regional disparities. Furthermore, we aim to find the country’s ranking in its geographic region (Central and Eastern Europe). A secondary focus of the study is on the Romanian citizens’ perceptions of inequality.

The findings suggest that, in its post-communist existence, Romania did experience economic growth but, unfortunately, little development, while inequalities became more severe.

This chapter focuses on the return of the East-West divide in the European Union, a divide neither new nor superficial. Dating centuries back in history, the divide is fuelled by persistent differences in the level of development of the Old (Western) Member States, and the New (CEE) Member States. Given the major geopolitical shifts shaking the current world order (i.e., the transatlantic deficit), overcoming the East-West divide is crucial for the EU’s future. This chapter will underline the morphology of the East-West “development divide” by focusing on its socio-economic determinants. It seeks to show that CEE membership to the EU has left largely untouched development indicators such as the urban-rural ratio, level of capitalisation and savings, entrepreneurship and innovation, integration in global/European production, technology, R&D chains, minimum wages, social expenditures, poverty, deprivation, income inequality, unemployment, and mortality. The authors consider that a sober, critical evidence-based acknowledgement of the European Union’s failure to make significant contributions to closing this development divide is worth our attention, and that the temptation to “reframe” this development gap in political, cultural, or even civilizational terms has the potential to create the greatest vulnerability for the EU and the international liberal order in the next years.

In the debate over the creation of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs), the discussion is often focused on either oil-based (e.g. Norway, Qatar, Kuwait, etc.) or non-commodity-based SWFs (e.g. South Korea, China, Singapore, etc.). Yet we are seeing a new development in the sovereign wealth fund arena; more and more countries are seeding sovereign wealth funds by leveraging non-traditional financial sources and are increasingly motivated by domestic developmental (including infrastructural development) imperatives. Interestingly, this process is taking place in a global context of rising nationalist sentiments and backlash against trade and migration. This paper outlines recent developments in SWF creation—especially by countries that are neither endowed with oil wealth nor possess sizable export surpluses to create SWFs with a development mandate. While contextualizing this study in the broader SWF literature, the aim is to provide a comprehensive overview on how different funding sources could be leveraged to meet long-term financial and socio-development objectives. Thus, the overall objective is to map out existing work on non-traditional sources of SWF growth and draw attention to hitherto unnoticed sources of funding: remittances.