Is international trade in good or bad shape?
A debate is raging about the future of globalisation. Concerns about supply-side shocks unleashed by the Covid pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have led some to argue that globalisation has gone too far. The just-in-time mentality has become outdated, and resilient and robust supply chains are back in vogue.
In response to the Intellectual Property waiver proposal submitted to the WTO TRIPS Council by India and South Africa in October 2020 (revised in May 2021), the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement, adopted at the 12th WTO Ministeri
What are the ‘health conditions’ of international trade? Since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, the future of globalisation has been debated. The conflict sparked an economic shock, with energy prices skyrocketing and 'bottlenecks' emerging along some key supply chains related to agricultural commodities. The dialogue between non-western powers, as opposed to typically Euro-Atlantic for a, such as G7 and NATO, suddenly turned tense.
The rhetoric of favouring local firms with trade policies cuts no ice with students of history. Such favouritism—which essentially involves taking unilateral policy measures that discriminate one way or another against foreign rivals—is undesirable for at least two reasons. First, it distorts competitive processes at home—which means it slows down the process by which successful domestic firms destroy failing local firms that cannot match the winners’ salary offers and terms for suppliers.
The European Union’s new trade policy motto of Open Strategic Autonomy is defined as ‘EU’s ability to make its own choices and shape the world around it through leadership and engagement, reflecting its strategic interests and values’. A vague definition, which suits the various sensitivities across EU member states. Yet, deeds not words are what will define EU’s Open Strategic Autonomy.
Digital trade is an essential and growing element of global commerce, but its growth is threatened by nationalist data protectionism. Overcoming this problem requires coordinated global policies that balance the gains from efficiency with the needs for protecting data privacy.
Il continente è terreno fertile per le monete digitali emesse dalle banche centrali. Tra opportunità di inclusione finanziaria e sfide sulle regole da definire.
Central Banks are putting forwards unconventional monetary policies to fight cliamte change.
For more than a decade, governments and businesses progressively issued conventional green and sustainable fixed income securities to address social and environmental issues. According to the Climate Bond Initiative, their issuance is on track to reach $1 trillion in issuance by 2023. However, there is growing scepticism regarding the market's integrity. Is it making a meaningful contribution to reducing sustainability and climate risks? Unfortunately, green labels do not seem to be an effective signal for identifying sustainable improvers.
In its final statement for the G20 Finance ministers and central bank governors, the T20 acknowledged that 2021 ‘marks a turn in the rich history of infrastructure investments and financing issues within the G20, in a time of more complex crisis than 2008.’
There is no shortage in economic literature on the importance of economic diversification for healthy, resilient, and sustainable growth, and numerous real case studies support such recommendation. Put simply, a country that puts ‘its eggs in one basket’ is at the mercy of exogenous factors that go beyond any government control, thereby undermining ‘prospects for longer-term economic growth’, as put by the World Bank.