Browse our job listings for more opportunities Compared to previous generations they live longer with their parents; earn less money, while working longer hours; are more stressed; and reportedly, have less sex. To compound this, they know it needn’t be this way, that their reality – sex put to one side – is a political choice that theoretically could be changed. With this in mind, it’s little surprise that the annual Deloitte Global Millenial Survey paints a picture of a demographic consumed by disillusionment and mistrust – bestowing Millennials the moniker the ‘disrupted generation’. Comprised of the views of over 13,000 Millennials from 42 countries and territories, the aim of the survey is to gauge the general Millennial mood, glean their opinions on the present, and judge their expectations of the future. The following is a brief summary of some of the larger takeaways. A lack of trust Faced with continuous technological and societal dislocation, Millennials are experiencing what was described as a growing sense of ‘uneasiness and pessimism’: the feeling that something isn’t right, that the cards they were dealt weren’t fairly distributed. Much of this found articulation in their general disregard and mistrust of traditional institutions, particularly politicians and religious leaders, neither of whom – in the view of the majority – are making a positive impact on the world. In addition to being thought of as inept, they’re also viewed as dishonest, almost half of the respondents having zero faith in either set of leaders as ‘sources of reliable information’. Trust, in fact, seems to be a diminishing commodity, falling elsewhere too. Over a quarter of respondents reported having no trust in conventional media as a source of accurate information. Indeed, it barely outranked social media platforms as a dependable means of accessing news, raising the question: who exactly do Millennials trust to disseminate facts? The internet offers something of an answer, having borne witness to a huge proliferation of alternative media. And yet, it still leaves much unclear. What can be said is that the declining faith in traditional pillars of trust, and the absence, as of yet, of an institution or group filling this void, is further fuelling the generational sense of uncertainty. Facts are an orienting force, foundations through which the world can be framed. Their lack, therefore, perceived or otherwise, is a thoroughly disconcerting influence. Falling trust, falling optimism Businesses have not escaped Millennial ire either, and are held in marginally higher esteem than their political and religious counterparts. Just 55% believed businesses were making a positive impact, after four consecutive years in which the figure hovered in the 70s. These results were driven by the growing sense that businesses operate in their own interest with little regard for society at large. Given the steady stream of scandal – the recklessness, for instance, that prompted the recession – environmental devastation – in which big business is routinely implicated – and everyday worker exploitation, it’s hardly surprising. Businesses, generally, were thought out of step with Millennials’ priorities, neglecting both their societal and environmental responsibilities. This misalignment has made them the focus of much scorn. Declining trust has, perhaps predictably, developed in parallel with a decline in optimism. While there is an acceptance that the economic situation in which they live is not a good one, Millennials have little expectation that things will improve in the foreseeable future – only 26% were expecting improvement in their countries in the next 12 months. From a personal perspective, over half were convinced that their own financial situation would either remain the same or worsen in the same time period. With ample time to have fixed, or at least better repaired, the damage wrought by the recession, what Deloitte has called pervasive 'pessimism,' could easily be called pragmatism. Industry 4.0 The forces of Industry 4.0 – visible now in the majority of workplaces – are expected to ramp up the disruption of the already disrupted careers of Millennials. Since their entry into it, the job market has been in constant fluctuation, and change, which has become its defining characteristic, is set only to increase. For some jobs, this has meant the assimilation of new tech, while for others it has meant full automation. With a convergent scientific community predicting that this trend will transform economies over and over, it was surprising that a quarter of Millennials thought the forces of industry 4.0 would have no bearing on their jobs at all. Equally strange was that just 49% thought new technologies would only ‘augment’ their jobs. These responses reflected an uncharacteristic optimism, or possible naiveté, that could have great consequences if they translate into political choice. Governments must ready their populations for automation and there is little indication that incumbents are up to the task. When choosing their successors, Millennials will have the decisive vote. The disrupted disrupt While Millennials have been the subject of much disruption, some disturbances have also been of their own making. Their behaviour, both passively – in delaying large purchases and having fewer children – and actively – their preparedness, for instance, to quit their current jobs – has, and is, profoundly affecting society and business. For example, Millennials expressed loyalty to companies that ‘deliver best on financial performance, community impact, talent development, and diversity and inclusion’. When these criteria are left unfulfilled, they indicated they would likely end their relationship with said company. Further disrupting business is their willingness to engage in freelance and contractual work, which many explained as paying better and affording greater flexibility. The ethical stance taken with regard to work is mirrored in how Millennials consume, the younger generations speaking with their wallets, rewarding companies they believe most respect their values. Again, making a positive impact on society was high on their list of priorities. This is forcing a profit-driven and, at times, callous business community to reassess the way it works, a response that has been slow but is underway. It also poses a serious challenge to companies that desire a stable workforce, as most do, for if left unimpressed Millennials will walk. Going forward Entering the job market as the recession unfolded, beginning careers in a post-crash world; it’s hardly surprising that optimism among the young is in short supply. Millennial lives have played out against a backdrop of perpetual social, political and economic commotion, with periods of stability practically non-existent. And yet, although disillusioned and often distrustful, they have remained both ambitious and altruistic, the survey showing most are still are confident that their life goals will be achieved. They may be down, but the ‘snowflakes’, as they are sometimes derisorily called, are far from out. To the contrary, they are intent on making a decent fist of it, despite living in a present defined by change and facing a possible future of even greater uncertainty.
Sandwiched snugly between generations X and Z, Millennials, it's fair to say, have had it tough. Entering the workforce around the time of the Great Recession and now enduring the disorienting forces of the so-called fourth industrial revolution (also known as Industry 4.0), their world has been one of constant flux. History is accelerating faster than ever and technological progress in some areas is exponential, rapidly changing the face of work. And yet, with the possibility of abundance now a reality, Millennials are experiencing their economic opportunities reduce, many privileges enjoyed by their baby-booming forbears – improving living standards, home ownership etc. – increasingly out of reach.
The election of Barack Obama in 2008 and the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq three years later was supposed to mark the decline of its influence, a decline that was widely believed would be terminal. After a decade of war, people were weary and with inequality spiralling, problems at home were considered of greater concern than escapades abroad. It felt like a spent force. The political arena reflected this too: the term ‘neocon’ was reduced to an epithet, a word of derision for Democrats, and occasionally even moderated Republicans, to hurl when in heated debate and seeking to score cheap points. Over time it lost much of its meaning - no longer a reliable indicator of political outlook, simply a way to denounce or discredit. And then came the election of Donald Trump, and like with much else, things changed. Despite his campaign blasting neocon’s signature policy, the invasion of Iraq, as a ‘big fat mistake’, Trump’s presidency has offered neocons a way back. In his three tumultuous years in office, his administration has welcomed back into the fold architect of the Iraq invasion and chief hawk, John Bolton, now National Security Advisor; and appointed war-enthusiast, Mike Pompeo, as Secretary of State. The political persuasion of both is well known, and in the case of Bolton, his penchant for war may well be his defining characteristic. A similar trend can be seen in the media. Newspapers and magazines have increasingly been featuring opinion of a neocon bent. From the New York Times to the Atlantic, the development is a marked one. With bellicosity of this kind on the up, consuming not just op-eds but presidential addresses, the feeling is eerily familiar - the neocons are asserting themselves, flexing their muscles once more. <11an>limit:2;categories:jobs|conferences;disciplines:Public Economics & Economic Policy (JEL H)|Economic Systems (JEL P)</11an> A short history of neoconservatism Given its overuse, a detour back to its origins and early development helps get a better handle on the ideology and its more dangerous proclivities. Neoconservatism was a child of the 1960s, born in response to the New Left and the growing pacifism that emerged in and alongside the anti-war movement. The hallmark of its early adherents - many who identified as liberals – and the source of their zeal, was an uncompromising opposition to the totalitarian Soviet Union. Fearful that the West was ‘losing its purpose’, its fingers slipping on the mantle of global moral arbiter, neocons advocated a strident foreign policy, in which America took centre stage. They scorned Nixon and Carter’s respective attempts at détente with the Soviet Union - conciliatory politics in the face of tyranny was anathema - and celebrated Reagan’s more confrontational approach to Cold War diplomacy. When the Iron Curtain did finally fall, it was a moment both of vindication and trepidation. Buoyed by democracy’s triumph over dictatorship, they were also - with the removal of the Soviet threat - denied their rallying point, their common cause. Rhetorically speaking, with no enemy they were left toothless. It was in this environment of doctrinal uncertainty that a group of its younger acolytes, including one Paul Wolfowitz, came together to explicitly reinstate the ideology’s key principles and to reinvigorate the movement. The paper was innocuously titled the ‘Defense Planning Guidance’; it soon became known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine. The paper expressed a desire to construct a world based on American ideals that would be driven by American-directed economic growth. This would, in turn, encourage the emergence of American-style democracies, where previously there had been despotism. The world was to be administered by alliances and inter-governmental organisations led, naturally, by the U.S, and protected by means of assertive diplomacy, economic sanctions, and when necessary, the American military. In certain cases, pre-emptive military action was believed to be justified. In short, the paper’s primary concern was to prevent the emergence of a rival global power. No region was to be dominated unless under the direct supervision of the US; only then could American safety be assured. Although not to a tee, these core principles informed most US foreign policy, irrespective of government, throughout the 90s and into the 00s. Neocons in crisis The project culminated in the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The ousting of Saddam Hussein - premised, as we know now, on twisted intelligence - was to serve as a Petri dish for reform of the entire Middle East and the attempt to spread democracy in the region. It was, in effect, a test of the base assumptions of neoconservatism. The policy was a disaster. Over a decade later, Iraq remains in chaos, ravaged by cycles of war, and the Middle East is more fractured and less stable since intervention. Through the failure, the ambitions of the neocons were brutally checked. Their idealism, based in large part on their arrogance, had clashed violently and catastrophically with reality. They were forced to confront the fact that America was not the omnipotent force they presumed, that the imposition of elections alone cannot transform a country, and that to think either was to be unacceptably naïve or unforgivably reckless. Re-birth? And this was supposed to be the end of it, humiliation the final death knell. Neoconservatism was, for most, no longer intellectually credible, its agenda bankrupt. The corridors of power were as far away as they had ever been. And a return looked improbable, if not impossible. That was until Trump. Under his presidency, erratic as it’s been, the impulses of neoconservatism are once again audible, and getting louder. In a contradictory series of events, their re-emergence actually began with Trump castigating the neocon project, deriding the Iraq War and talking down the possibility of future overseas intervention. His campaign promised a focus on Americans, plans framed largely economically: how money was to be saved, where costs could be cut etc. The expense of conflict made it unappealing and to be avoided. Three years in office, however, and things now look very different. The revolving door of his administration has let in hawks John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, who, in the absence of a confirmed Secretary of Defence, are de facto Trump’s most influential foreign policy advisers. And their effect is being felt. On assuming their respective roles, both set about asserting their long-held contempt for Iran, quickly bending U.S foreign policy to such feeling. Bolton has repeatedly insisted on the necessity of military action to deal with the ‘rogue’ government, an obsession that has consumed him for the better part of three decades, while Pompeo has declared that ‘there is no doubt… a connection between al-Qaeda an Iran’, and that the country’s continued ‘bloodletting and lawlessness’ needs to be stopped. With the relentless admonishments ringing in Trump’s ears, the increasingly agreeable president was easily persuaded to abandon the Iran nuclear pact. The deal had no bearing on Tehran’s desire to develop nuclear weapons, his two advisors reasoned, and therefore served little purpose. For Trump, the opportunity to dismantle any part of Obama’s legacy has rarely required much justification. Soon after, the duo pushed through the decision to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group, against the advice of many military officials who warned it might encourage retaliation. In true neocon speak, Pompeo explained it as part of an attempt to ‘help the people of Iran get back their freedom’. Again, Trump quickly acquiesced. The openness and conviction with which this hawkish hostility is held appears to be infectious, the free-flying browbeating emboldening other lower profile Republicans to also speak out. Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, for instance, recently joined the fray, boasting that the U.S. could defeat Iran in ‘two strikes, the first strike and the last strike’. Ominously, these developments are taking place in a growing ecology of neoconservative thinking by no means exclusive to Trump’s inner circle. Prominent journalists Ari Fleischer, Max Boot, and Robert Kagan are all regularly talking up the advantages of a pre-emptive strike on Iran to their large and loyal audiences, while broadly liberal publications have been reserving countless column inches for those hankering after conflict. Bret Stephens, writing for the New York Times, declared only this month that if Iran doesn’t change its behaviour, ‘we should sink its navy’. Talk of this kind is dangerous; that invasion is viewed so simply, staggering. As analyst Aaron David Miller has said, in case of invasion Iran ‘has many options available to it’. It is a powerful nation with proxies situated throughout the region. Utilising them, as it would if conflict arose, it easily commands enough military strength to badly hurt America: Hezbollah could strike Israel, Shia militias in Iraq could attack American forces, and Iranian backed groups could go after Americans in both Syria and Yemen. The conflict would be messy and destabilise a region already so fractured and volatile. Despite this, according to reports, the Pentagon is planning to increase American presence in the region by 5000-10,000 troops, this after an aircraft carrier, bomber planes and anti-missile batteries have already been sent. Trump has also committed to significantly enlarging military spending, what would be the largest increase in the country’s history, and at the end of June 2019 reportedly blocked a US strike on Iran 10 minutes before it was planned. The signs are not good. War with Iran looks closer than it has done for many years. Neocons have infiltrated the Whitehouse, and are bending the ear of its attention-seeking inhabitant, acclimatising him to their sabre-rattling rhetoric. Meanwhile, an increasingly compliant media is egging them on. The necons may not be huge in numbers but, evidently, they occupy positions of serious influence. For the sake of peace, it's time we all took notice.
In its short and controversial history, neoconservatism has changed America. For almost 60 years, the ideology has variously been embraced and rejected; celebrated for its patriotism and commitment to democracy; and disdained for it hawkish arrogance and imperialistic tendencies. It has simultaneously proven uniquely divisive, while also unifying people across party lines. Quite simply, recent American political history cannot be made sense of without an understanding of neoconservatism; such has been its influence.
Public Economics & Economic Policy (JEL H)
Powering the West’s rise from provincial backwater to global force, they permitted Europeans, for the first time in hundreds of years, to experience better living standards than their forebears. More recently, coal-based growth also became an obsession of developing countries, notably China and India, where, in the latter half of the 20th-century industrialisation advanced at breakneck speed, lifting billions out of extreme poverty. Herein lies the great irony. As a result of climate change, these previously poverty-alleviating forces now look set to plunge those billions, those who have just extracted themselves from subsistence living, back to the brink. And such is the speed of the change and our reluctance to address, and in some cases even accept it; the return could be made in less than a generation. Although in areas better prepared, the West, too, stands to suffer greatly, the consequences of climate deterioration destined to afflict indiscriminately, ignorant of national borders. The last year provided a taste of things to come, as North America was subjected to droughts, hurricanes, and forest fires, of sizes and severity previously unknown, leaving parts of the continent ravaged. And there will be no let-up; the regularity of such events is set to increase. The only question is: how far will humanity let things slide? Browse our PhD listings for more opportunities GDP set to plummet In terms of GDP, the devastation that awaits is on a scale that exceeds what is currently economically conceivable. As David Foster Wells has so eloquently explained, the spectrum of growth with which we have any experience, and thus can realistically fathom, ‘stretches from contractions of about 15%, effects we study still in histories of the Depression, to growth about half as fast – about 7%’. Quite simply, today’s terminology and categories are not really capable of reflecting developments outside of these parameters. Unfortunately, outside of these parameters is exactly where we are heading. In one projection – based on the work of respected researchers Solomon Hsiang, Marshall Burke, and Edward Marshall – in which the terms of the Paris Agreement are fulfilled and warming is limited to 2.5-3C, global per capita output is reduced by 15-25% by 2100. For context, this is comparable to, and actually slightly higher than, what was experienced in the 1930s. The difference, however, is that this time around there’s no guarantee a recovery will even be possible. What in today’s economic terms is called a ‘trough’ could become the new economic baseline, the new norm. In fact, on our current course, we’ll be lucky to even get there: the global emissions trajectory, as it stands, has us comfortably missing the commitments made in Paris. Indeed, with climate-threatening leaders Trump and Bolsonaro presiding over two of the world’s largest polluters, the Paris agreement could soon be considered the high point of climate change consensus – no longer a realistic target, simply a nostalgic reminder of collaborative times gone by. The Great Dying The required transformation of energy infrastructure alone would require the mobilisation of people and resources never before seen in peacetime. Warming of 3C, 4C, 5C, or even worse, therefore, remain distinct possibilities and require contemplation – to warn us away from such paths if nothing else. According to the report cited above, 4 degrees, which lies ‘on the low end of the range of warming implied by our current trajectory’, is predicted to cut global output by more the 30%, far more than the Great Recession of 2008, which saw a reduction of 2%, and double that of the Great Depression. Foster-Wells has called this fate the ‘Great Dying’ – if reached things would continue to worsen inexorably. To grasp the enormity of what awaits, and to inform sensible future conduct, it’s helpful to perceive of our climate as a superstructure within which we operate: we are governed by its rules and forced to adapt to its conditions. When these conditions are degraded the consequential impact infiltrates every aspect of life, as every aspect exists within the structure. From the regulation of bacteria in our bodies and the air we breathe, to our ability to travel the planet unencumbered and access water, literally everything is at stake. The same holds true for our economies, both local and global. The warming of the globe, and with it, the natural disasters, flooding, and health crises it entails, will incur costs economies will struggle to absorb, many we are already beginning to see. Countries with a large share of GDP in the agriculture sector, as most developing countries do, will especially suffer, because of all industries agriculture has a particularly low resilience against rising temperature. A report published in Nature Communications in 2017 has predicted that as a result of droughts and water shortages, the U.S will see its annual crop yield decrease 40% by the end of the century. In a pattern typical of climate change, things are projected to be far worse closer to the equator. On our present path, and without huge technological advancement, India, sub-Saharan Africa, Brazil, and much of Southeast Asia face the devastation of their agriculture. The UN has predicted that, in turn, this widespread crop depletion will help create 1 billion climate refugees by 2050, placing further pressure on less-damaged agriculture elsewhere. Then there is flooding. None but the most modern infrastructure is built to withstand the type of relentless flooding that’s coming, and that in parts of the world we’ve already seen glimpses of. America and India are particularly vulnerable, having aggressively and rather carelessly developed their coastlines. In just a matter of years, luxury sea-facing apartment blocks and hotels in places like Miami Beach will soon become underwater relics, while densely populated metropolises like Mumbai, Chennai, and Kolkatta, home to tens of millions, will ‘face catastrophe’, as invading waters cause untold damage. By 2045 the real estate impact on New Jersey alone is predicted to exceed $25 billion. Across the world, flooding in March 2019 – just a single month – created $9 billion in economic losses, highlighting what analyst Michal Lörinc called ‘the continued vulnerabilities which exist in both developed and emerging markets’. Hurricanes, too, are being created with greater regularity and greater force, rising temperatures increasing their rainfall and wind speeds. Hurricane Florence, which hit the Carolinas in 2018, raged for almost 3 weeks and was estimated to have caused up to $50 billion worth of damage. Without intervention, the regularity of such events will grow, and there will come a time that our inaction will designate when there is simply not enough wealth, locally or globally, to cope. Rebuilding will become a constant state. Declining productivity Just as healthy productivity rates will be needed to mitigate the coming chaos, they are stagnating, and, unfortunately, predicted to fall further – this, too, a result of warming temperatures. Research, like that from the Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, has exposed the negative cognitive effects of direct heat, showing, with alarming precision, how unproductive humans are expected to become as the world warms. ‘When global warming reaches 1.5, 2, 3 and 4°C respectively, the average Work Productivity Loss (WPL) will be 9 (19), 12 (31), 22 (61) and 33 (94) days for developed (developing) countries. Countries in Southeast Asia in a 1.5°C-warming world would suffer the same loss as the developed countries would in a 4°C-warming world.’ With every rise in temperature, GDP suffers, and like compound interest, the effects increase over time. Evidently, the costs of acting on climate change are enormous. What’s also clear, though, is that the costs of not acting are far greater. Market logic can no longer be relied on; it shouldn’t be expected to benevolently act on our behalf. Instead, concerted, coordinated and cooperative intervention is needed. An uncertain future Given the global political landscape, this feels far-fetched. From those with the power to address climate breakdown, we’re accustomed to bluster and virtue signalling, that is, if its reality is even accepted. The main concern is always the next election, never the next generation. And so carbon continues to be emitted into the atmosphere at record rates. Even with imagery of climate degradation saturating global media, little seems to change. The West, in particular, has been guilty of a ‘thank god its not on my doorstep’ mentality. And yet, it is; it’s on everyone’s. Even to those apparently blind, this will soon become incontrovertible. As it is, economies across the world stand braced, many already under the strain of climate change. As costs continue to wrack up, as they will without action, some will buckle under the pressure; this we can be assured of. What follows is anyone’s guess. What we do know, though, and what history instructs us, is that finding out is a risky game indeed.
The history of economic growth, the kind to which we are now accustomed, is inseparably intertwined with the discovery, and then plunder, of fossil fuels. Some historians have even argued their unearthing was its main catalyst, relegating more popular theories of free trade and technological innovation. The argument is seductively simple, and although something of an exaggeration, usefully highlights the strong connection between the two – for in tandem, they radically altered the course of human civilisation.
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics (JEL E)
Economic Development, Innovation and Growth (JEL O)
Agricultural and Environmental Economics (JEL Q)
In 2017, the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change found that 153 billion working hours had been lost worldwide due to high temperatures, predominantly on farms, and that high temperatures were simultaneously affecting the ability of crops to grow. And Professor Paul Elkins of University College London argued in response to these findings that tackling climate change ‘is going to be a net benefit to humanity in monetary terms.’ Download the INOMICS Handbook! But economics hasn’t cottoned on. Most dominant economic theories work on the assumption that technology and progress can overcome any biological/ biophysical limitations the earth may have. This, of course, isn’t true; we are beginning to see some of the limitations of our unsustainable existence, the above being just a few examples. In 1966 economist Kenneth Boulding called this economic conception of the world the ‘cowboy’, that being a metaphor of the noble wanderer who roams the ‘illimitable plains’ of endless discoverable resources with no thought that they might, at some point, come to an end. Boulding said all the way back then that the problems our planet is facing are ‘not all in the future by any means’. Indeed, they are currently more visible than ever. But this apathy or disinterest with dealing with the problem of climate change isn’t limited to economics. A 2018 Gallup poll revealed that only 64% of Americans think climate change is caused by human activities, and of those only 45% believe it will be a serious threat in their lifetimes. In the Pacific countries and east Asia, only 37% believe climate change will harm them personally, and just 26% of people in the Middle East believe climate change is a problem that is harming people right now. Multiple techniques have been used to change attitudes, including showing the connections between climate change and air pollution and health problems, or to things like the aforementioned forest fires in the USA. Multiple techniques have been used to change attitudes, including showing the connections between climate change and air pollution and health problems, or to things like the aforementioned forest fires in the USA. A common tactic is to show people how important it is to take a personal responsibility for the problem. Unfortunately, this often causes a phenomenon called cognitive dissonance, which is a feeling of discomfort when a person’s beliefs are challenged by new evidence given to them. In the case of climate change, this actually causes people to turn away from the issue due to feelings of guilt, rather than work to combat it. Instead of giving people personal responsibility, a better method is to get people to believe climate change is a communal issue that requires action from the whole community, society, and world. However, a small but growing field of economics wants people to think about the environment in a different sense altogether. If questioned, would you be able to estimate the monetary value of the earth’s ecology? If this figure existed, would it make people stop and think a little harder about exactly what it is we’re destroying? Would it make people care more about the environment if they knew mistreating it would negatively impact the economy? These are questions ecological economics aims to answer. Cowboys and cosmonauts Ecological economics is, in part, a reaction to the traditional cowboy conception of the world. Boulding’s idea was to instead think of the world as a ‘spaceman economy, in which the earth has become a solitary spaceship, without unlimited reservoirs of anything’, and in which human beings must find their natural, sustainable state. In this metaphor, all we have is what is on our spaceship with us – and when that runs out, the money runs out, too. As Robert Costanza, a leading ecological economist, put it in his 1989 article ‘What is Ecological Economics?’, the discipline aims to ‘make economics more cognizant of ecological impacts’ and simultaneously ‘make ecology more sensitive to economic forces, incentives, and constraints’. Costanza reiterated what Boulding had said over twenty years before: ‘current economic paradigms… are all based on the underlying assumption of continuing and unlimited economic growth.’ To combat what Costanza saw as the ‘ignorance’ humans have of the world’s environmental and economic interdependence, he explored technology’s capacity to circumventthe limits of the environment. His conclusion? Technology can’t endlessly circumvent the environment. The limits exist, and economics needs to realise this, soon. Ecological economics argues that using only GDP as a metric (as many economic fields currently do) is unreliable because it doesn’t take into account the costs of things like pollution and deforestation; in its place, it argues for GPI, Genuine Progress Indicator. GPI uses the same data as GDP, but adds things like income gaps, poverty rates and environmental damage. By this judgment economic worth peaked per person in 1978 and we have actually become poorer due to our destruction of the environment. In this sense, the discipline bears similarities to the green and environmental movements that began gaining ground in the 1970s. Ecological economists recognise – and they argue that ‘standard’ economists often don’t realise this, or at least choose to ignore it – that growth cannot be endless. In an interview from 2010, Costanza noted that ‘in nature, things don’t grow forever’. Instead, organisms reach their natural adult size, and then they stop. But this doesn’t mean they stop improving. Organisms continue to develop even after they stop getting physically bigger – like an adult human that isn’t getting any taller, but continues to read books and go to the gym to get smarter and fitter. Constanza admits that the thought of the economy no longer growing is a terrifying one for regular economists, but argues that the economy stalling isn’t a bad thing. Rather, what is needed now is progression to a ‘steady state’, in which our society still improves, but our economy doesn’t get bigger. The revolution will be green In a nutshell, ecological economics attempts to show how human economies and natural ecologies are intrinsically linked and have evolved together through time. The field bridges the gap between economics and several other disciplines, including archaeology, history and anthropology. It wants to change the common understanding that human technology can overcome any boundaries the world throws at us by showing that this judgment is unsustainable and, essentially, wrong. But ecological economics is more than a call to action for economists to change the way they think about the world: it also tries to talk about the natural world in a way people can understand. In 1997, a paper came out that estimated the value of ‘ecosystem services’ – that is,the monetary value of the ecological systems that contribute to human civilisation – at $33 trillion per year. The GNP of the entire world at the time was around $18 trillion. Talking to people in terms of monetary figures helps them comprehend the worth of the environment and the scale of the problem. Money talks. Ecological economists have grasped that. What’s the solution to the forthcoming environmental disaster, then? Sustainable development and green policies, according to ecological economists. The International Society for Ecological Economics, for example, states its purpose as ‘developing a sustainable world.’ Its solutions to the current problems include research into environmental tax reform, how equity relates to sustainability, and how ecological and economic models can be integrated to protect biodiversity and the earth’s atmosphere. To this end, it publishes the latest cutting-edge research on topics such as clean development, transnational conservation projects, and the effects of deforestation in its journal. And it’s not the only one: there’s also the International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics, founded in India, which aims to link the discipline to a closer study of ecological statistics. But this isn’t just research for the sake of research – the field wants to change people’s attitude towards ecology, and genuinely influence policy. The International Society and these two journals have developed against the backdrop of a rapidly deteriorating environmental situation and a political sphere that doesn’t seem to care about the crisis we’re facing; yet at the same time, the green and environmental movements have never had more public support. With natural disasters abounding, Western countries dropping out of climate agreements, and nonsensical debates over the actual existence of climate change still being held, the field has an essential role in showing that the economy is fundamentally linked to the natural world we are rapidly destroying. As it becomes increasingly clear that environmental catastrophe is just round the corner, it’s time for economists – and politicians, and everyone else – to finally start paying attention.
In 2018, the World Meteorological Organization published its statement on the State of the Climate. The report showed that the 20 warmest years on record have occurred in the last 22 years. In the same year, the State of California’s Energy Commission published a report linking changing atmospheric conditions due to global warming as a direct cause of the devastating forest fires that swept through California, burning nearly 1.9 million acres’ of land and costing more than US$3.5 billion of damages.
How to post an Announcement with us To post your announcement, please follow the steps below: Create a free account. You can find the "Create Account" on the top right corner of our websites Login to your account Click on “Publish” on the top right hand corner of the website Choose the Announcement level and promotion type that you want Enter all the Announcement details. We recommend that you have all the details ready beforehand, in a word document. Preview and publish your announcement. See tips and tricks below Confirm your details and your Announcement will go online shortly after NOTE: New user accounts are subject to a quality check for the first post - this is typically completed within one working day. Top Tips & Tricks for Posting an Announcement 1) Schedule your announcement to be published in the future As general rule, in the posting form once you press the “Save” button your announcement will go live on the website. If you would like to have a little extra time to edit your announcement and get it approved by your team, we recommend scheduling it to go online at a convenient time in the future. While uploading the content of your announcement, your will find a field which allows you to choose the publishing date of your announcement, where you can set it to go live in a couple of days or even hours. 2) Classify your announcement using the best matching disciplines and type of opportunity On INOMICS we have 5 main categories of opportunities that you can promote: jobs, courses, study programs, funding options and events. Additionally, you can choose between 19 disciplines (JEL codes) in economics and social sciences. Our users are profiled according to their discipline and career stage. Therefore, the reach of your announcement depends on how well you classify it. For example, if you are offering a summer school in digital business and economics, the classification under courses (summer school) and disciplines (Business Economics - JEL M, Innovation & Growth - JEL O) will guarantee exposure correctly on INOMICS. 3) Upload an effective description of your offer The description of your offer should be concise and clear. In the description, you have a space in which to explain your job, study, event or funding offer or opportunity at your institution, or, you can explicitly invite readers to participate in your upcoming event. It is important to deliver enough information to our users so that there is just enough to catch their attention and motivate them, but not to overwhelm them with an unnecessarily long text. Further details can always be found on your website by clicking through, if our users are interested. Focus on what you are offering, important dates like the application deadlines and start dates, why they should apply, and what you expect in applicants. 4) Add a header image If you book a featured or premium announcement, you have the possibility to upload a header image. Header images are very prominent on your announcement page and in the listing/search result pages, so they offer an excellent space to include an eye-catching campus picture which leaves our users with a positive impression of your institution. Other customers use the header images to include branding information such as a slogan of the institution or mission of the program they are promoting. 5) Upload a quality logo The logo uploaded in your announcement is later used in the listing and search result pages, for the creation of mini banners, listing in our email alert and display in social media. In order to appear styled and visible, we recommend that you upload square logos with a minimum width of 300 pixels. In this way you ensure that the brand of your institution is carried neatly and legibly. 6) Use the image gallery If you book a standard, featured or premium announcement, you have the possibility to build a carousel of images into your page. This is an opportunity to display your campus, research and study facilities, team pictures and events, and other marketing pictures that you have available. Depending on the level of announcement, up to 10 pictures are allowed on the page. The maximum size of the pictures should be 2MB. Best performing pictures are rectangular, with a size of a 2:1 ratio. 7) Keep the title of your announcement short and relevant The title of your announcement will be displayed in different places on the website, therefore its relevance and length will help you to attract more users to your announcement. Long titles are cut after 80 characters in our search results, as well as in additional advertisements such as those in email alerts and mini-banners on the website. A maximum length of 80 characters including spaces is recommended to avoid distortions in the title of the announcement. 8) Include tracking links to better measure the results from your campaign The results of your campaign can be measured in terms of brand exposure, traffic delivered to your site and number of applicants. In order to make life easier and measure the effectiveness of your campaign quickly and easily, we recommend that you include tracking links. With a tracking link you can find the traffic delivered by INOMICS directly in your Google Analytics report. You can set up a campaign name, medium and source for us, so that you can easily track the number of sessions, users, and behaviour directly on your website. On the following link you can create a tracking URL to be used on your announcements: Campaign URL Builder 9) Include concrete calls to action (CTAs) in your announcement As we mentioned before, the main goal of your announcement is to motivate our users to enquire more about your opportunity and ultimately, apply. By suggesting concrete actions in the description of your announcement you will help catch readers' attention and drive them to your website or specific landing page. Each Announcement includes by default the possibility to include an "Apply Now" button and a “Visit Website" link, however you can add more actions in the description of your announcement. Suggested CTAs include: download a brochure, send an email to admissions, call a telephone number, visit the website, etc. 10) Add relevant tags to your announcement On INOMICS each piece of content includes tags. Tags are used to recommend relevant content to users and to identify content with a specific topic. Including accurate and concise tags will help you to make your announcement more relevant and visible to the right audience. Include tags related to the topics and disciplines of your offer, or add tags related to locations, relevant research areas or requirements for your desired applicants. 11) Use the Direct Applications / Apply Now Function By activating the field "Receive Direct Applications", an Apply Now button will be shown on your Announcement page. Interested candidates can submit their documents and a cover note directly on INOMICS. The applications and documents are saved conveniently in your INOMICS user account. You will be notified when their are new applications (maximum one notification per day) by email. If you need assistance posting your announcement, please feel free to contact us at info@inomics.com. We are also happy to set up, format and post your page online for you as part of our posting assistance service - you just need to provide us with a URL, a word or PDF document with the content of your announcement and we will create a preview announcement for you. This posting assistance costs an additional €75+vat per announcement.
Read our tips and tricks on how to maximise your announcement listings with us. We hope that this helps you to boost your recruitment and advertising campaigns on inomics.com and receive the best possible results. In this article we'll share with you, the Announcement publication process and our top 10 tips and tricks for posting an announcement.
The INOMICS Questionnaire: Fratzscher vs Rossi-Hansberg
Download the INOMICS Handbook! Marcel Fratzscher: What is your favorite place on earth? Esteban Rossi-Hansberg: My office: The thrill of having my own space to work and concentrate has never gone away since I got my first office at Stanford’s economics department in 2002. Perhaps the reason can be traced back to my PhD. Back then, Chicago Ph.D. students did not get their own desk. I wrote my dissertation in the cafeteria of the Business School. MF: Outside of economics, what occupation would you have if you could be absolutely anything? ERH: I would be an artist or a chef. I love the creativity and the sense of accomplishment. If you think about it, it is not that different from research in economics. There is a technical part to our work, but the most creative (and best) part involves coming up with useful and beautiful abstractions. MF: What is the virtue you appreciate the most? ERH: Smarts are always useful, but in my experience not that scarce; at least in our profession and at the level required for most endeavors in economics. For me, the most important quality is perseverance and the ability to work hard continuously over many years. MF: Your all-time favourite figure in economics? ERH: I have three favorites, Friedman, Becker and Lucas. In my view, this trio has defined and expanded the reach and methodological rigor of the field more than any other. MF: Your #1 economics blog? ERH: I am not an avid reader of blogs, but I like VoxEu. It is a good, fast way to stay connected with research on a number of issues not directly related to the topics I study. I also like that it is based on real research, not just opinions MF: Your ideal student? ERH: Independent, smart and with a lot of grit. MF: What should be done to address a gender bias in research in economics? ERH: Focus on ideas and their quality, not on who produces them. MF: What is the most misguided research agenda in economics? ERH: Reduced-form empirical studies of the overall economic impact of climate change are misguided. How can we aggregate and extrapolate over hundreds of years without relying on theories of the economic mechanisms of adaptation? MF: What is the most promising current research field or issue in economics? ERH: Quantitative spatial economics: The theory and quantification on this topic have evolved dramatically, and the tools are ready to be applied to a large variety of extremely important substantive issues. There are very few topics in economics where space is not important! MF: Where does economic research have the most influence on policy-making? ERH: Probably monetary economics: Inflation is under control almost everywhere because research helped understand the mechanisms that generated it. The reaction of monetary policy during the great recession was very much driven by existing research as well. MF: On what issues should policy listen more to economists? ERH: Local policy and local investments: Governments and international institutions spend fortunes developing infrastructure and promoting reforms that affect local economies without doing proper, stateof-the-art, evaluations. Urban and regional economic policy is much more influenced by architects and urban developers than by economists. This should change. Economists have good tools to improve spatial and urban policy as well as resource allocation and infrastructure across space. MF: What is your career advice to a young economics researcher? ERH: Try to be methodologically broad, specialize only on topics, never on research techniques. Thematic specialization can lead to more depth in your knowledge, methodological specialization will only put limits on your capabilities as a researcher. Header Image Credit: Marcel Fratzscher / DIW and Esteban Rossi-Hansberg (kindly provided)
Esteemed economist, Princeton Professor, and friend of INOMICS, Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, generously took time out of his busy schedule to take part in the second INOMICS Handbook Questionnaire. Opposite him, in his customary role of quizmaster, was Professor Marcel Fratzscher, president of the DIW Berlin, and one of Germany’s leading voices in macroeconomics. Keeping with tradition, and as a nod to the heavyweight reputations of those involved, we dubbed the encounter ‘Fratzscher v Rossi-Hansberg’. What played out proved illuminating and often personal, the dialogue shedding light on the inner workings of the mystery that is the ‘economist’s mind’. For anyone even loosely connected to economics the following conversation will make an interesting read.
How the Economics+ approach is changing the face of the discipline
A growing number of graduates from this program have ascended the ranks in many sectors, from banking and consultancy, to NGOs and International Development. The Master’s is distinguished not only by its impressive academic staff but also by its adoption of the Economics+ approach to teaching. To find out more, INOMICS sat down with Economics Lecturer and Researcher at Radboud, Charan van Krevel, for a chat about the MSc in Economics, his time as a student, and his position now as part of the Economics’ faculty at this great university. Much is made of the Economics+ approach that underpins the teaching of the Master’s program. How does it differ from more traditional ways of teaching economics? Traditionally taught economics approaches economic decision-making from a solely rational perspective. People are assumed to be optimizers: creatures capable of processing all available information when confronted with a choice, and who act simply to maximize their own happiness. In reality, we are constrained by the physiology of our brains and, most importantly, by our environment. Therefore Economics+ integrates insights from psychology, law, and sociology into its methodology, to better understand the occasionally counter-intuitive decisions people make. We do not negate the traditional perspective entirely as there remains much to be gained from its study; rather, we shift the emphasis toward a holistic approach to human decision-making. How did the Economics+ approach develop? Economics+ has actually been the main characteristic of our Bachelor’s and Master’s programs for a long time. Even before the crisis in 2008—which revealed the dangers of trusting any economic model that had the “optimizing individual” at its base—we placed great emphasis on the context in which economic processes happen. In the short time since its inception, Economics+ has really gained in popularity, and not just in the Netherlands. This development, I believe, owes a lot to the teaching and research of Economics at the Radboud University. What advantages does the Economics+ approach bring to studying, work and life generally? First off, I should say that it’s not required for students to have prior experience of Economics+; in fact, most do not. Introductory courses like Pluralisms in Economics will bring students up to speed. With respect to the advantages it offers, we believe Economics+ helps foster a more realistic and nuanced approach to looking at the world. It challenges students to constantly look beyond their pre-existing conceptual horizons—a process that is designed to produce critical, flexible and adaptive problem solvers. These skills, when developed correctly, are crucial in devising policies, and are something that both companies and governments have expressed admiration for when describing our alumni. We welcome prospective students who are motivated, eager to learn, and looking to expand their horizons. We also believe that this critical attitude and broad perspective that Economics+ instils is transferred to the way we perceive and engage with society. It enables us to better understand the viewpoints of others—crucial for consensus building—and prevents us from developing tunnel vision. Ultimately, these skills help us engage with each other more constructively in the political, economic, and social arenas. I am confident that exemplars of Economics+ will contribute to building bridges. Where do graduates from the MSc in Economics typically end up? What are the career prospects? The career prospects are promising! 95% of our graduates find a job within 6 months of graduation, and 35% of graduates already have a job even before graduating. Usually, they choose large enterprises, with 100+ or 1000+ employees, but some also prefer smaller companies. The type of occupation they pursue depends a lot on their specialization. Still, a large portion of our graduates decide to go into consultancy, whether it is financial or accounting, or they go into banking. Some also opt for a career in international development, at an NGO or a government. Of course, some graduates, like me, stay in academia to teach or do research. How much one-on-one time should prospective students expect while studying the MSc in Economics? One-on-one time with lecturers is either built into a course itself, or is optional. For instance, when you write your master’s thesis you will have a supervisor, available to you personally, with one-on-one time. Additionally, most lecturers have an open door policy if students wish to visit them or discuss something one-on-one. Our small scale teaching strategy is not only about built-in one-on-one time, but also relies a lot on student initiative and lecturer approachability. Does the department support students in finding internships? And are there existing links with other institutions that help facilitate this process? We find it important that students have the freedom to choose an internship if they so wish. There are several organizations with ties to Radboud that have internship programs for students. Some of these organizations are student-led, while others are independent companies. Either way, we give students the freedom do an internship by awarding credits for their completion. Your students have ranked you highly on their student evaluations. What exactly about your teaching style do you think led to this? Although I can’t speak for my students, I can describe my teaching philosophy. For students to learn something I have to present information in a way that makes them want to learn it. So often I use humour to explain a dull theoretical concept; other times I provoke them by arguing an unpopular opinion and challenging them to prove me wrong, rewarding them when they succeed. Ultimately, I always want to engage with my students on a personal level. In trying to do so, I often use examples from my personal life. I tell my students that by the end of the course, I want to know all their names. Content-wise, I always keep in mind why I find something interesting myself, and try to inspire my students by exhibiting my sincere toddler-like curiosity. Being alumni of the Economics+ program and now a lecturer at the faculty what would you say the program has contributed to your professional success? Why did you choose the Nijmegen School of Management at Radboud University for your studies? And if you had to choose again, would you make the same choice? I owe a lot of my professional success to the program and being granted the opportunity to join the lecturers who inspired me as a student has been an absolute privilege. I remember when I first enrolled in the Economics Bachelor’s when I was a teenager. I decided to study economics because it was by far my favourite subject in high school and I wanted to pursue a career at a financial corporation, perhaps as an accountant. But somewhere along the way my curiosity for science and economic thought drove me towards academia. My performance in the Master’s distinguished me from my fellow students and my experience as a lecturer gave me the chance to pursue my dream of becoming a researcher too. The study climate in Nijmegen has definitely been conducive to my relative success. I got to know my professors personally while I was a student, and they encouraged me to follow my ambition, something that was hugely motivating. Moreover, the city of Nijmegen itself has always been the most comfortable place to live. I often travel the world, but there’s no place like Nijmegen. Despite some bumps I’ve experienced along the road, I wouldn’t have wanted it any other way. And finally, where is the best place to relax for economics students at Radboud University? That’s tricky, because Radboud has so much to offer. Personally, I like going on serene walks in one of the many parks that border the campus, or the huge forest that’s close by. In my student days I often turned to the vibrant city centre or one of the beaches. Nijmegen is not a coastal city, but we have several lakes and rivers that have fantastic beaches on their banks. There are also some concert venues in- and outside the city centre that I still frequent, in addition to the array of other nightlife options.
Situated in the oldest city of the Netherlands, Nijmegen, Radboud University has firmly established itself as one of the country’s most reputable institutions of higher education. Offering programmes across the academic spectrum, its MSc in Economics, in particular, is attracting students from all over the world.
Non-Profit Sector: Job Options for an Economist
Check out our economics job listings Governmental jobs: state and local One of the biggest employers of economics graduates are governments, both state or local. Governments hire economists at all levels to help shape policy, analyse data, and make predictions. Skills required of this line of work tend to include statistical expertise, modelling, data management, data entry and research assistance. The advantage of these jobs is that they are often both stable and reliable, meaning you'll have great job security and likely have good benefits like vacation time and pension payments too. In our age of high-stress and over-time, these bonuses should not be overlooked! International agencies International organisations, specifically international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), are also big employers of economists. INGOs, like mission-driven organisations the Red Cross and Médecins Sans Frontières, and NGOs, like country-specific organisations the Danish Refugee Council and the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, are all in constant need of economists. The work offered at these organisations is best suited to those who are driven by social causes, and ideally who have a specific passion for the mission of the organisation. On the downside, the work can often be less well paid and less stable than in other fields. That said, the work is among the most worthy out there. Economic development organisations These organisations work toward the economic development of specific areas, cities, or regions. Counted among their ranks are the Arab Forum for Environment and Development and the Alaska Native Arts Foundation. Essentially, they work to influence policy and promote economic development in any given area. The jobs offered in this sector are suited to those with business skills and financial acumen, but also a commitment to a particular region; its local politics, arts, and culture. Union organisation Another area in which economics graduates can find work is in trade union organisations. Trade unions aim to improve labour relations and worker safety and benefits. They are essential in any capitalist society for protecting workers from exploitation. For those with an understanding of politics, seeking to affect change in complex structures, union work can be incredibly rewarding and can make real improvements to the lives of the people involved. Unions can represent both a particular group of skilled workers (such as nurses) or a whole industry of people (such as healthcare unions). Environmental and sustainability roles A growing area of employment for economists is the environmental and sustainability sectors. When an alternative energy company, or initiative, wants to promote the use of their technology over others, they usually employ a team of economists to demonstrate the long-term savings that their technology could bring about. This could be you! As governments are increasingly making steps towards sustainability, more and more funding is being made available for renewables, meaning this sector is growing, and growing fast. As a consequence, there are plenty of job opportunities. City planning and housing organisations The final areas may not be glamorous but are extremely important to people's quality of life - urban planning and housing organisations. Particularly in large cities, the pressures of gentrification and rising rents have led to wide-spread housing shortages. Housing organisations attempt to address this issue by promoting policies like rent caps, by helping tenants who are facing illegal eviction by their landlords, and by arguing for an increase in rent-controlled housing. These organisations are often small and not always very well funded. They do, however, make a direct impact on the habitability of the areas in which they work.
You know that there are a ton of career prospects open to someone who has studied economics, spanning from academia and the finance industry, all the way to management consulting. A big advantage of studying economics is that it gives you a skill set which is applicable and transferrable to many different fields. One particular area of work open to economists is the non-profit sector. Many are drawn to this sector for social reasons; the desire to make a positive impact on the world. It is a highly admirable area to work in, and something that we at INOMICS massively endorse! So, what kind of non-profit jobs are actually available to economists? Here are our suggestions that may be applicable to you.
Urban, Rural and Transportation Economics (JEL R)
Check out our economics job listings Couching reporting in such hyperbolic terms is nothing new, characterising, as it does, the bulk of mainstream print and broadcast media. Click bait culture has ensured it’s a profitable ploy that makes sound business sense. Its utility in helping society navigate the effects of automation - the tumultuous nature of which is already being felt - is harder to reason. Instead, the incessant deployment of the utopia/dystopia dichotomy seems to have helped foster inertia - a worldwide paralysis of inaction. Big changes are afoot and as The Economist has said 'no one is ready’. The majority of political discussion on the topic offers little in the way of reassurance. Much of the right appears to have taken its traditional recourse in moments of concern: invoking the ‘magic of the market’. An untrammelled market will balance things out they promise, trickle-down economics this, deregulate that. Such rhetoric provides little comfort, particularly to those who have already lost their jobs. The left, on the other hand, has been strangely quiet on the issue, some factions believing fears of automation are being mobilised as a distraction from more pressing issues like the dismantling of the welfare state. In all likelihood, it will require a large and collective political effort to avoid the most dislocating effects of automation. And the beginnings of such a project are currently nowhere to be seen. What's in store? What exactly should they be preparing for? Some say we’ve been here before, and should, therefore, look to the past for guidance. Societies have endured the industrial and digital revolutions, both of which prompted concern over the disruptive effects they would have on the job market. And yet, as they transpired, neither caused the social crisis of extreme mass unemployment many predicted. Instead, jobless rates have continued to rise and fall with the business cycle. The signs, however, point to this wave of automation being different to previous: both faster and more encompassing. Whereas in the past the jobs automated tended to be either manual jobs - prior to the industrial revolution working in agriculture and then later standing on an assembly line - or very narrow computational work calculating numbers, technology is now beginning to displace jobs requiring intellectual or cognitive capability. Learning machines are already making decisions and solving problems quicker and with fewer mistakes than humans, meaning typical white-collar work like quantitative analysis and report creation, particularly when repetitive, are becoming the domain of the machines. Office work, as it’s currently known, is on the verge of being consigned to history. Ultimately, the proportion of work susceptible to automation is getting larger and larger, and no sector is safeguarded from infiltration. Job loss, job change The common retort at this point is that new jobs will be created. And this, of course, is true; new jobs will arise, some presumably that we currently are unable to even fathom. What we don’t know is how many, and of what kind. Because this wave of automation is expected to permeate every corner of the economy, there is a concern the number of jobs created will not offset the number lost. Quite how large the discrepancy will be is unclear. What is certain is that the job market will become increasingly unforgiving. Historian Yuval Noah Harari is recommending that workers of tomorrow should expect at least a handful of occupation changes in their lifetime, such is the changing face of the economy. This is a big deal. For the majority, enforced career change is a radical upheaval, often involving a troubling mix of emotional stress and financial instability. A decade ago, to experience it once was to be considered unlucky. For the coming generation, to experience it twice will likely be thought remarkably fortuitous. Smoothing this transition, if at all possible, will require a transformation of educational systems. In their current form most do little to prepare people, skills-wise or emotionally, for a future defined by change. Soon, too, the ability to actually switch careers may come to be considered a privilege, as when a job is automated and a new one created, there is no guarantee that the newly unemployed person will have the skills required of the new job. What happens then? To quote Harari, 'if you think about a 40-year-old unemployed textile worker in Bangladesh, he or she just doesn't have the skills to design virtual worlds.' And still, the A.I revolution is just a blip on the political radar. Much of the American political class, for instance, seem more wary of Mexicans taking jobs than computers – and thus, with priorities misaligned, the requisite preparation is not being made. Governmental provision of lifelong education, accessible to all and available at any time, could be one intervention that helps stave off the creation of a class of people unneeded by the economy, and potentially deemed surplus to requirements. Indeed, if that scenario did come to pass, a large portion of humanity’s fate would rest in the hands of the powerful. And relying on their benevolence is a risky game. It's all a bit pointless While some jobs created may be inaccessible to many, a large portion may also simply be undesirable. It has been argued that the productivity benefits of automation we are experiencing, instead of leading to a shorter working week, as predicted by John Maynard Keynes in 1930, have instead created an array of pointless jobs, the existence of which cannot even be justified by those who do them. These roles often exist to: bolster the egos of employers, for instance, assistants; to work aggressively on their behalf, such as lobbyists and corporate lawyers; and to ameliorate preventable problems, like programmers that repair botched code. Anthropologist David Graeber has written extensively on this, citing studies that reveal the alarming extent to which people are unsatisfied with their work. In a culture that strongly associates work with self-worth, this is profoundly damaging. And as automation ramps up, his fear, shared by many, is that this trend will continue and the psychological suffering will be widespread. With growing regularity, universal basic income (UBI) is being touted as a potential remedy to both unemployment and the proliferation of ‘pointless’ jobs. Historian Rutger Bergman, for instance, has come to prominence riding the back the UBI wave. Its experimental provision has been recorded as ameliorating the damaging psychological effects of joblessness, while providing its recipients with the freedom to choose jobs (if they exist) they value, rather than being rushed into one they don’t. Again, though, in most quarters UBI is still considered a radical idea, and would require a strong political will for its implementation. For now, at least, this remains some way off. Inequality and unaccountable power The trend towards extreme inequality, as exists across the Western world, also stands to hypercharge the potential problems caused by automation. If left unaddressed, the problem will not be the robots themselves, but rather those who own them. Labour-saving technology is often expensive - precluding its purchase by just anybody - and affords its owner great power. From a financial perspective, once invested in, automated elements can significantly reduce costs and increase the efficiency of a company such that rival enterprises are simply run out of business - ask a record shop owner what they think of Amazon. Through this development, the means of production, already owned, relatively speaking, by a tiny minority, will concentrate into fewer and fewer hands. In a world of diminishing resources, this could prove particularly dangerous. To instead ensure the spoils are at least somewhat shared, it will be incumbent on politicians to regulate, both nationally and internationally, against this, probably through the enforced democratisation of businesses and the breaking up of the biggest companies. Given the influence big business already exerts over the democratic process, through campaign funding, lobbying, etc., this will likely be fraught with difficulty. Without intervention, global power could continue to tip away from governments towards businesses, specifically tech companies, a transition that could make the might of today’s behemoths, Google and Facebook, look insignificant; think Dave Eggers’ dystopian novel The Circle. Action is needed Of course, the issues outlined above represent just a few automation has, or probably will, throw our way. There are, no doubt, many more in store, some that may come in recognisable form, and others that will likely arrive abruptly, without warning, and challenge the conceptual foundations on which we live. What is imperative, therefore (and yet remains conspicuously absent) is that we consider, on a political level particularly, these potential changes and prepare for them as best we can. The lessons are there: the industrial revolution wreaked untold damage on the neediest, and protective reforms only arrived after many lives had been ruined. We must use this as a guide to ensure society pre-empts a repeat of such unnecessary hardship. If ignored, automation, combined with the threat of climate deterioration and the inevitable competition for space and resources, has the unprecedented power to take us to any number of unimaginably dark places. It need not, or rather, it should not be that way - a brighter future can be built and is still within our grasp. It just requires action.
Automation will transform our world; there is no doubt about it. Quite how, though, is highly contested – whether optimist or pessimist, there are predictions to match every predilection. Newspapers alternately run articles speculating a work-free, post-capitalist future filled with armchair philosophising, with forecasts of a world ravaged by inequality in which robots tend to the mega-rich, and everyone else is cast onto the scrap heap to contemplate what-on-earth went wrong. Little, it appears, exists in the in-between.
2019 European Elections Threaten to Bring the EU to Standstill
For these reasons, the upcoming elections hold great significance, and in terms of the EU going forward, could yet be defining. The centre ground across much of Europe has been vacated, no longer thought equipped to deal with the problems the continent faces, and populism from both the left and right has rushed to fill the political void. These changes will be reflected in the results of the elections, quite in what form, though, remains to be seen. What could such changes spell for EU politics? And should we be worried? Here we take a look at the paths down which the union may potentially turn, and consider the immediate future of the biggest trading bloc the world has ever seen. The complexion of Parliament The vote - scheduled for 23-26 May – will dictate which 751 MEPs sit in the European Parliament (EP). In its current constellation, the European People’s Party (EPP) representing the centre-right, and Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), representing the centre-left, form a majority, together making up 54% of the assembly’s seats. This has been hugely beneficial in terms of creating law. Owing to the cooperation of the groupings, the mechanics of EU politics, notoriously both slow and disjointed, have been lubricated, and through negotiation and compromise the last 5 years has seen a steady flow of legislation passed. However, if national politics and polls are anything to go by, this looks sets to change, and radically. The EPP, for instance, looks set to be punished at the polls. Since 2012, centre-right parties have lost popularity across the continent - a trend encapsulated by the Sarkozy induced capitulation of Les Republican in France. More recently, the bloc has also suffered from disunity, unable to agree on how best to deal with a Hungarian government intent on dismantling democratic checks and balances. The wedge issue continues to disrupt the group's cohesion, and the Hungarians remain controversially suspended. Across the floor, the S&D isn’t expected to fare much better. Since the financial crash, its member parties have seen their domestic support slide. In fact, social democracy across Europe looks moribund. German, Dutch, and Italian centre-left parties, in particular, have all had their share of the vote decimated, and there is little sign of the tide changing. Only in Portugal, and perhaps to a lesser degree Spain, is there anything resembling social-democratic revival. It looks, then, as though big change is dawning. Next month we could potentially be looking at an unrecognisable European Parliament, fragmented and divided between integrationists and nationalists, Europhiles and Eurosceptics, and right and left wingers. But could this mean for actual legislation? The effects on legislation Well, such an impasse, as some observers are predicting, would almost certainly make the already difficult process of passing legalisation even trickier. While this might detract from the parliament’s legislative efficiency, a more 'open-to-all' decision-making process may have a positive effect on public interest in democracy at the EU level. However, if populist parties gain enough power to block crucial decisions, as its perfectly plausible they may, all the other parties will have to pull together to keep the EU functioning - and there is no guarantee that will be feasible. In such a scenario, movement on issues like migration and Eurozone reform - likely to be centre-stage during campaigning - would almost certainly stall. For Emmanuel Macron this development, this potential legislative logjam, would be especially frustrating. The French President had made integrationist reform a priority of his; a commitment that has taken on additional personal significance because of the problems he is experiencing at home. Throughout his presidency he has been especially vocal about the need for reform of the Eurozone, suggesting that Europe should harmonise its tax policies and establish a minimum wage in each country. Italy’s far-right Lega party - projected to increase its number of seats by around 20 - is expected to lead a serious challenge to these proposals, and have already shown their disdain for EU prescriptions when they agreed, with their Five Star Movement partners, to a sharp increase in domestic public spending. This flew in the face of repeated admonishments from the EU that Italy must rein in its public spending amid fears it could trigger a debt crisis. Other mooted proposals for further EU integration include the creation of an EU Finance Minister, a joint Eurozone budget, and the establishment of a body tasked with overseeing bloc-wide economic policy. With a larger Eurosceptic faction in parliament these, too, are likely to be kicked into the long grass. Hungarian Premier and populist stalwart Viktor Orban has disparagingly likened such calls to an attempt to build a ‘liberal empire’, and instead has talked up a Europe based ‘strong nation states’ and ‘Christian culture’. To achieve this he believes that migration must be better controlled. This leads us to the area where, besides merely stifling policy, right-wing parties may have the power to seriously influence policy agenda. Although diverging on multiple issues, there is a consensus among them for stronger collective border controls and the militarization of borders. Also discussed has been a possible expansion of policing operations across North Africa, aimed at blocking African migration routes to Europe - the nationalist right has long favoured military solutions to social problems. Post May elections Evidently, an influx of EU-phobic, right-wing MEPs would make the tone of parliamentary debate harsher and legislation harder to pass. At the same time, it could also set the stage for mainstream MEPs to speak out more stridently in defence of European values and the European project more generally; an activity the Brexit remain campaign conspicuously neglected. Routinely, we fail to recognise all that the EU has brought us in its short history – workers rights, environmental protections, lasting peace - too often these are taken for granted. It really wasn't so long ago that none were guaranteed. If we truly are about to enter a battle for the continent’s future, progressives among us better prepare a positive, aspirational vision. And given the false sense of security that seems to have descended, a gentle reminder of the EU’s past achievements could make for a useful start.
With the European elections just two weeks away the EU’s future is looking far from certain - the union is beset by crises and the resolve of its member states is being tested like never before. Much has changed since Europeans last took to the polls: Ukraine had its borders forcibly redrawn when an increasingly hawkish Russia invaded and annexed Crimea; global drought, poverty and violence drove record numbers of refugees to the shores of the Mediterranean; and China has continued its march as a formidable economic and political force. There has also been the small matter of Brexit and the emergence of a populist movement that has made electoral gains across the continent. The current moment, evidently, is one of flux, and the full implications of the transforming political landscape are still to be fully understood.
Resources for economics students to learn statistics
However, if your background is more in social sciences than in mathematics, statistics can be a challenging subject because it is unfamiliar. Not only are there new concepts and terms to learn, but also the quantitative approach of mathematics differs from the argumentative approach of most social science subjects. Not to mention the assignments, which are likely in the form of short answer questions and tasks rather than essays or longer form answers. Browse our program listings for more opportunities If you're an economics student and are struggling with statistics, however, you don't need to despair! In addition to the statistics courses that will almost certainly be a part of your studies, there are many more resources out there which can help you learn. In this article, we'll go through some of the different resources that are available to help you learn statistics. Websites When there is a particular topic you need to understand or a specific technique that you want to use, then you can quickly find information online. If you just need a formula or an explanation of a term, then Wikipedia can be surprisingly helpful, as some of their statistics pages are quite a high level. But for more in-depth knowledge, then you want a speciality statistics site. Blogs are also a useful source of knowledge. One useful site is Discovering Statistics, which is the site run by British professor Andy Field. It has all of the information on statistics that an average undergraduate would need, and topics are explained in a funny and easy to read way. The big advantage of this site is that it is written in plain English, with no jargon or difficult to understand terminology. If you're more of a words person than a mathematics person, then this site will suit you well. Another great site is Stat Trek. This site has tutorials, tools, and tables as well as information on statistics. It is aimed at advanced high school students, but will cover most of what undergraduate students need to know as well. Doing tutorials that let you work a problem through from the beginning to the end is an excellent way to build your confidence at working with statistics. Finally, Simply Statistics is a good resource for more advanced students. This site has a blog with thoughtful blog posts about data science plus interviews, information on conferences, and links to courses at online learning institutions like Coursera or courses hosted independently by other academics. <11an>limit:2;categories:jobs|courses|conferences|Professor;disciplines:Econometrics, Statistics and Quantitative Methods (JEL C)</11an> Podcasts Something to remember is that learning statistics isn't only about memorising equations or specific statistical terms. It also requires a broad understanding of mathematics, probability, and numerical accuracy. In order to build your broader knowledge, you can turn to resources like podcasts. Most podcasts are more fun and casual than textbooks, but that doesn't mean they aren't useful learning tools. Plus you can listen to them while you travel or while you're doing jobs around the house, allowing you to learn in this downtime. One of the most popular statistics podcasts is More or Less: Behind the Stats from the BBC. This podcast digs into a statistics topic each episode, such as recent episodes on vaccines and herd immunity, assessing the value of foreign aid, and how to calculate mortality following a natural disaster. The podcast Partially Derivative ended in 2017, but there is still a big archive of episodes available. This podcast covers the “data of everything” with a specific interest in computing, and looks at the data related to topics like AI, deep learning, and bots. Finally, a useful podcast hosted by two data scientists is Not So Standard Deviations. They discuss the latest news in the field of data science and dive in depth on topics like the use of statistics program R, books in the field, and specific examples of topics relevant to statistics. A recent series on the podcast has been a chapter by chapter discussion of the book Design Thinking by Nigel Cross. Online Courses If you want more in-depth help with statistics, such as learning a topic before your semester starts or catching up on something important that you missed in your lectures while you were sick, then you can try an online course. There are lots of free online courses available which might include video lectures, slides, exercises, and more to teach you a topic. Sometimes the course materials are available for you to work through at your own pace, but often the materials will form part of a course which you take over a number of weeks. While online courses can't offer the direct teaching and classroom environment of an in-person course, they can get you up to speed on the essentials of a topic to help boost your confidence and get you over a statistics hump. We have a full article with 10 free online courses in statistics, but we'll break down some of the best here as well. Intro to Statistics from Stanford University and Udacity. A course that lasts 8 weeks in total and is aimed at students who have no university experience with statistics at all. The perfect course for new undergraduates who are worried about the statistics component of their course and want to prepare in advance. Statistics: The Science of Decisions from San Jose State University and Udacity. This self-paced course typically runs for around 4 months, depending on how fast you work through the material. This is a more advanced course, suited for an undergraduate who has already completed an introductory statistics course. The background required for this course is a basic understanding of proportions (fractions, decimals, and percentages), negative numbers, basic algebra (solving equations), and exponents and square roots. Statistical Thinking for Data Science and Analytics from Columbia University and EDX. This course takes 7 – 10 hours per week and runs for 5 weeks, aiming to teach the principles of statistics as applied to data science. It is an introductory course for no knowledge of statistics is required to start. Learning from Data from Caltech. This is another self-guided course, so lectures and homework are made available and you work through them at your own pace. The course teaches an introduction to machine learning by focusing on the application of algorithms and applications to big data. Because it is more specialised than the other courses, this would be a great choice for an economics student who is interested in getting into data science but wants to get some experience in the topic before deciding whether to take a full in-person course. General interest books As well as textbooks, you can also learn about statistics from more general interest books which are geared towards the public. Obviously, these books will not have the same depth or detail as an academic text, but they are quick and fun to read and help broaden your understanding. If you have a holiday coming up or a bit of free time and you want to learn while also enjoying yourself, try out some of these books: Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game by Michael Lewis is the book which the famous movie about statistics and baseball was based on. It tells the true story of a struggling baseball team who turn to a statistician to help them select new players and to improve their team. These events had a huge impact on how modern sports operate, and the book serves as an example of the power of statistics when put into practice. Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell is another famous book which gained a huge public following. It describes the factors that makeup success in various fields, and as a part of this it covers a lot of material about probability, statistics, and economics. It's not a serious academic text but it's a fun and easy read. Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by Steven D. Levitt & Stephen J. Dubner is a book which aims to make economics exciting. By looking at topics in pop culture, it teaches readers about the essential principles of economics, including statistics. The authors find fun and quirky examples to make their lessons engaging and easy to read. Looking for a graduate program to continue your studies? Check out our program listings.
A subject that many new economics students – and some older economics students too – struggle with is statistics. Statistics are an essential tool for economics, allowing data analysis and modelling to be accurate and mathematically correct. More broadly, statistics are of great importance in all of our daily lives.
Econometrics, Statistics and Quantitative Methods (JEL C)
Also, as a reader it's useful to know about the most popular and prestigious journals, so that you can more easily locate information which you need when doing literature reviews. For this reason, today we're sharing a list of the top 10 journals in the field of economics, so you can see at a glance which are the big-name journals which you should be aware of. Looking for a job in economics? Check out our job listings. 1. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press This is the oldest English language professional journal in the field of economics, and one of the most respected. It covers all aspects of the field, but has a specialisation in microtheory and macroeconomics – both empirical and theoretical work. 2. Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press Another long-standing journal, the Journal of Political Economy was first published in 1892 and has since covered both theoretical and empirical work in economics which could have long-term impact on the state of the field. Its specialisations include monetary theory, fiscal policy, labor economics, development, micro and macroeconomic theory, international trade and finance, industrial organization, and social economics. 3. Econometrica, Econometric Society With a specialisation in econometrics, this journal has been established since 1933. It aims to attract high-quality research through awarding of the Frisch Medal every two years, which recognises outstanding research published in the journal. 4. American Economic Review, American Economic Association Established in 1911, this is another well-established and well-respected journal in the field of economics. Once a year, in May, an issue is dedicated to presenting proceedings and papers from the annual meeting of the American Economic Association. 5. Journal of Finance, American Finance Association For the related field of finance, the Journal of Finance is the top place to publish, along with the Review of Financial Studies and the Journal of Financial Economics. 6. Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier For those researching in macroeconomics and monetary economics, the Journal of Monetary Economics is an essential read. Covering empirical, methodological, and theoretical work, recent topics have included banking, credit and financial markets, behavioral macroeconomics, business cycle analysis, consumption, labor supply, and so on. 7. Journal of Economic Growth, Springer With a focus on economic growth and dynamic macroeconomics, this relatively new journal established in 1996 covers all aspects of growth, including growth models, income distribution, human capital, fertility, trade, development, migration, and money. 8. Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press Another long-established journal, RESTUD as it is known is a must-read for theoretical and applied economics. It was founded with the specific intent to publish work from young and up-and-coming economics researchers; a mission which it continues to this day. 9. The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press In the field of quantitative economics, the Review of Economics and Statistics is the gold standard. The bringing together of expertise from the fields of statistics and economics has resulted in hugely influential models, and this journal covers the most important aspects of this approach. 10. Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier Another influential journal in the area of econometrics is the Journal of Econometrics, established in 1973. The focus of the journal is on econometrics methodologies as well as the way in which these methodologies can be applied to substantive areas of economics. With these ten journals, you should be well up to date on all the latest happenings in the field of economics.
All academics know how important it is to get your work published. The journal which you publish your work in can have a big effect on how it is perceived and on how many people it reaches, so it's important to make the right decision when submitting your work for publication. You want to make sure that you submit to a journal which has a strong professional reputation for your work to be taken seriously.
The different types of fellowships available for postdocs
If you want to start a postdoc then you need to know about the different types of postdoc positions that are available. Typically, a postdoc can be paid a salary from a variety of sources: either paid directly by the PI from their research budget, or from being awarded a fellowship by an outside funding body. Getting a fellowship is generally considered a better option than being employed directly by a PI, as with a fellowship if you decide to move to a new institution or change to a different research topic you can keep the fellowship funding with you. There are a number of different types of fellowship that are available for postdocs, so if you are looking to apply for a fellowship then you will need to know what options are open to you. In this article, we'll talk about the different types of fellowship available to postdocs. Browse our postdoc job listings for more opportunities Browse our funding & scholarship listings Teaching fellowships A common way for postdocs to earn a salary is through a teaching fellowship. This means that the postdoc will have a regular teaching load for undergraduate, masters, or PhD students and will usually be responsible for lesson planning, setting and marking assessments, and supporting students on top of their regular teaching and research duties. The exact course load that a postdoc is required to teach will vary between fellowships, but it will often be around about equivalent to a half time teaching position. The advantage of a teaching fellowship is the direct, hands-on experience of teaching that it provides. In some countries, such as the U.S., having teaching experience is extremely important for getting a professorship position, so it makes sense to get as much practice in teaching as possible. In addition, some people find teaching less experienced students and conveying an interest in the subject to them to be extremely rewarding. The downside of a teaching fellowship is that it involves a whole extra job on top of your research duties, which can often end up being pushed aside when you are busy with teaching. In some countries in Europe, teaching is considered less prestigious than pure research and so the preference would be against teaching fellowships. If you do take up a teaching fellowship, be prepared to juggle responsibilities to students as well as to your own research. Individual fellowships Arguably the most desirable form of fellowship, an individual fellowship is awarded to you as a postdoctoral researcher in order to pursue the projects that you want. Even if you decide to move to a new institution or start a new project, you can continue to use the fellowship money for your salary and research expenses as it is tied to you personally, not to a position at an institution or specific research topic. This means that if you have an individual fellowship, you have quite some leverage over where you work and what you research. Most institutions are happy to take on a postdoc who comes with their own funding, so you get to choose which institution and department you want to work at. Individual fellowships will usually be awarded for a period of two to five years and will cover costs like your salary, research expenses, and sometimes even pay for supporting positions such as a PhD student or research assistant. Within the category of individual fellowships, there are a variety of sources of funding that we will consider next: Government funding One of the biggest sources of funding in most fields is government research organisations. Bodies like the National Science Foundation in the U.S., the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in Germany, or the Medical Research Council in the UK provide funding to researchers at all stages of their careers including postdoctoral. Some research topics attract more government funding than others, as governments tend to fund more projects which will have a direct and money-saving impact on governmental tasks in the future. However, often your project may be able to fit in more than one topic area, which you can use to your advantage. In the UK, for example, a psychology project would usually fall under the Economic and Social Research Council, but if the project has a clinical focus then it could also go under the Medical Research Council which generally has more generous funding available. Look into the specifics of which government bodies give out funding and try to identify where your project has the best change to receive funding. In most cases, you will apply for funding from the government of the country that you want to work in. So, if you are originally from France but you are currently working in the Netherlands and you plan to stay there for the foreseeable future, then you should apply for funding from Netherlands funding bodies. However, there can be some restrictions on government funding based on your citizenship and residency status, so check into this before you apply if you are an expat. Institutional funding Another source of potential funding is the institution at which you currently work or at which you want to work in the future. Universities have large research budgets, some of which will be allocated to postdoc positions. These fellowships can be for teaching and research or for pure research. These fellowships tend to be slightly easier to apply for and less intensely competitive than fellowships from governmental bodies. The advantage of these fellowships is that it is relatively easy to get funding if you are already working in a department. The disadvantage is that the funding is tied to a particular position, meaning that if you want to move to a new institution or take up a new project then you will lose your funding. Institutional funding can also be used for short-term periods to cover you between two longer periods of external funding, for example. So you can get institutional funding for six months or so while you are applying for a major grant from the government. Travel fellowships Finally, one type of fellowship funding that may be of interest is travel fellowships, where funding is offered for postdocs to travel to an institution in another country to gain knowledge or skills. This generally happens when a postdoc knows someone in research in another country, such as a collaborator, and wants to visit them for a shorter period to work together. If the hosting institution is supportive, then the postdoc can apply for a travel fellowship to cover their travel costs and salary during this period. You apply for funding from the country that you want to visit – so if you currently work in Japan but want to travel to a U.S. institution then you would apply for travel funding from the U.S. institution. Travel fellowships generally last between one and six months and can be a great support for postdocs who want to gain new skills. It is usually best to apply for a travel fellowship when there is a specific skill, type of knowledge, or technique that you can learn from the foreign institution that you cannot get from your own institution. The travel fellowships most likely to be awarded are those with a specific goal in mind, and in which the postdoc can return and spread knowledge among their home institution. Browse our programs listings for more opportunities
After finishing a PhD, most researchers who want to stay in academia will go on to one or more postdoc positions. As a postdoc you may conduct your own research, but most likely you will be supporting a principal investigator (PI) who decides what topics will be investigated. As a postdoc you will perform research, supervise PhD students, teach undergraduate or masters students, and present work at conferences and workshops.
Tips for reformatting your manuscript to submit to a new journal
Browse our job listings for more opportunities 1. Look up the formatting guidelines on the journal website Before you begin reformatting, make sure that you know exactly what the requirements of your new target journal are. Don't assume that just because you have formatted for one journal in your field that the requirements will be the same for other journals. Each journal will have its own requirements in terms of fonts, layouts, required appendices, image formatting guidelines, and supporting materials, so make sure that you research this thoroughly before you begin the reformatting process. You can find a full list of formatting guidelines on the website for the journal you are aiming to publish in. 2. Remember to check your tables One part of reformatting that always seems to take forever is formatting your tables of data. Tables are finicky and tend to break when compressed or stretched to fit different paper sizes or margins. Make sure that you check every single one of your tables to see that it is displaying correctly under the new formatting requirements. 3. Use a tool like LaTeX to format more quickly If you are looking for a way to make reformatting easier and you are fed up of using a word processor like Microsoft Word or Open Office Writer, then you can try a specialist academic typesetting program like LaTeX instead. LaTeX is a little more complicated to use than a standard word processor as it requires you to separate out your content and your formatting and to indicate your formatting choices through the use of a markup language. However, once you have a document prepared in LaTex then you can change the formatting of that document very easily. With a few clicks you can change the fonts, margins, columns, emphasis formatting, and more throughout the entire document. Instead of having to go through your entire manuscript and change every time you use italics, for example, you can just change the italics formatting setting and all of the italic text will be changed for you. If you have the time and patience to learn to use LaTeX now, you will save a lot of time on reformatting in the future. 4. Print your colour images before you finalise them Most academics read all of their journals electronically these days. But don't forget that journals are still printed on paper and that there is a group of people who prefer to read in this format. While text will typically not need any tweaking to look presentable in both electronic and paper formats, you need to pay attention to your figures or images to make sure that they look okay when printed. This is especially true if you use colour images, as colours can vary a great deal between printing and electronic display. Once you have reworked your images and you are happy with how they look on screen, do print them out and check how they look on paper. Often you might find that the colours look too washed out or too dark on paper, or that labels and other text are hard to read. Tweak the colour settings of your images until you are happy with them both on screen and on paper. <11an>limit:2;categories:conferences|Professor;disciplines:General Economics (JEL A)</11an> 5. Check your reference format One of the most time-consuming tasks when it comes to reformatting a manuscript is preparing all of the references or the bibliography. There are many different styles of reference that are used by different journals and it takes a lot of time and concentration to make sure that every reference is done with the exact correct punctuation, use of initials or names of the authors, formatting of the journal name, referencing the page numbers, and so on. If you have a shorter reference list, you can make these changes by hand. But if you have a very long reference list, then you may want to consider using a tool like Mendeley. Mendeley lets you keep a list of all of the references you are using for a project, and then can display those references in various different formats like APA or MLA. Once you have uploaded your reference list to the program, this makes reformatting your reference list much quicker. 6. Suggested reviewers Some journals will ask submitting authors to suggest other researchers who could be contacted to review the paper. Not all journals require this, so if you are submitting your paper to a new journal which does require it, then take some time to think of an appropriate person or people. You want to choose someone who you do not work closely with or know personally – so don't suggest someone in your department or someone you frequently collaborate with – but you do want someone who knows the field well. If you have met your suggested reviewer a few times, that's okay, but it shouldn't be someone you're close with. Pick someone whose work in the field you know and respect and who you think would have a clear and fair understanding of the work that you've done. 7. Data sharing Different journals have different policies about sharing data. In addition, your institution might have policies on data sharing that you should be aware of. Wherever possible, sharing your data helps demonstrate your transparency and commitment to high standards of research, as well as contributing to the broader academic community. Look into the journal's data sharing options and discuss with your co-authors and others in your department to find out if you should share your data publicly. 8. Cover letter Just like when you apply for a job, your cover letter for a journal submission should be adjusted to the particular requirements of the journal. Don't use a standard template letter for all of your manuscript submissions, though it is okay to start with a standard template and then make tweaks according to the journal. Try to specify why your work would be of interest to the particular readers of the journal in question – for example, is the journal read mostly by clinicians, or researchers, or educators? Also, if possible try to link your manuscript to a theme of the journal or to other articles which have previously been published in the journal. This helps to support the idea that your work would fit in with the journal's message and would be interesting to its readers. 9. Plagiarism detection Many journals now have some kind of electronic plagiarism detection, where you must upload your manuscript for it to be automatically checked against other work for similarities. Uploading your document and getting the detection software to accept it can take a few attempts and more time than you think, so don't leave this until the very last minute if you're on a strict deadline. 10. Be patient, it will take time When you need to reformat a paper, at first you might think that it will be a quick job. After all, you just need to tweak a few things with the layout, right? Unfortunately, the reality of reformatting is that it always takes more time than you expect. Even though the changes you are making to your manuscript are minor, it still requires time and attention to make sure everything is correct. Set aside a week or two to perform all the reformatting and try to be patient, as it will inevitably take a while to get the manuscript ready for your new journal submission. Looking for a graduate program to continue your studies? Check out our program listings.
As every academic knows, writing a paper for submission to a journal is a long and arduous process. It is common for papers to be rejected from the first journal that you submit to, so you will have to reformat the manuscript and resubmit it to another journal. This process of reformatting requires quite a bit of work, even when the paper is staying essentially the same and the only changes being made are cosmetic. Every journal has its own rules about formatting such as fonts to be used, margins, the type and number of images allowed, and citation format. To help you with this process, here are our tips for reformatting your manuscript to submit to a new journal.
Trump's failed attempt to bring back coal jobs
Check out our economics job listings Election promises There was obvious political expediency behind such a statement. As a message, bringing back coal jobs remained potent in the rust belt, particularly in states like West Virginia, ravaged by years of industrial decline. And as the election proved, it was sufficiently persuasive; Trump’s carrying of states such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa – for many years blue – forged his unlikely route to the White House, despite losing the popular vote. As an election ploy, however, promises of coal riches, much like the rock itself, are one-use-only. If after great effort – as has been made – employment and money don’t return, the promise loses its credibility. And as the 2018 midterms showed, this reality has dawned and the grumbles of discontent are increasingly audible. From an economic perspective, the pinning of such significance on coal was always questionable, to say nothing of how catastrophic it is environmentally. As of 2018, coal made up just a sliver of the American economy, employing around 75,000 people. Or, put another way, fewer people than currently work at bowling alleys or nail salons. Renewables offer the answer Even if enlarged far beyond its current state – a project that would be prohibitively expensive – the industry is an incredibly inefficient means of job creation, for a number of reasons. Typically, the process by which energy is extracted from fossil fuels is mechanised and capital-intensive and does not require much human involvement. This is in stark contrast to the renewable energy industry, which is far more labour intensive. Solar panels, for example, require humans to install them, and wind farms need technicians for regular maintenance. If you want jobs, renewables are where they are. Statistically, this fact is already reflected in the number of Americans employed in renewable energy: around 260,000 work in solar power alone, over three times that of coal. The wind power industry also employs more than coal, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) estimating around 100,000 nationwide. And these numbers are growing: wind power technician is now the fastest growing job in the whole country – a fact unlikely to escape Trump’s lips any time soon. Positive Projections In a recent study assessing the sectors' potential for job creation, the NREL concluded that renewable energy technologies ‘create more jobs per dollar invested than conventional electricity generation technologies’. And, because they use ‘indigenous’ resources, most of the ‘energy dollars can be kept at home’. The study left little doubt: if the rust belt is to be redeveloped and employment levels boosted, investment into green energy is the way to go. It is less costly, less polluting, and the jobs it produces are more plentiful. Looking forward, the U.S. Department of Energy has estimated that ‘to achieve 20% wind power by 2030 the United States will require more than 100,000 additional wind turbines, creating more than 500,000 new jobs.’ The Wind Vision Report has made similar predictions, suggesting that wind has the potential to support more than 600,000 jobs in manufacturing, installation, maintenance and supporting services by 2050. The job creation would also be geographically well distributed. Turbines can be installed in rural areas at existing farms, often places that have suffered declining incomes and living standards, and where financial injection is most needed. A widespread program of wind farm installation across a state like Illinois, for instance, could provide significant boosts to otherwise flailing local economies. As one expert put it: ‘from a community perspective, the effects could be transformative.' The stimulation of manufacture Commitment to renewables also has the knock-on effect of stimulating manufacturing, an area which has declined across the country and another of Trump’s foremost gripes. This is already happening and wind, again, provides a good example. Turbines are complex bits of machinery, and their construction involves long supply chains. In response to growing demand, their parts are increasingly being sourced from within the US: between 2004-11, the number of manufacturing facilities increased tenfold. With additional commitment and investment in the sector this could be developed even further, and its benefits maximised. As of 2018, around 50% of ‘turbine value’ was produced in the U.S, twelve times that of just a few years prior. Many manufacturers are now planning to increase this to 100% – an expansion that should be encouraged at the federal level. Such impetus would certainly be a preferable alternative to the current situation, where jobs in coal have not been forthcoming. According to Andrew Cosgrove, a Bloomberg Intelligence senior analyst, Trump’s ‘impact on the coal sector [thus far] has been extremely minimal in nature despite his rhetoric.' After two years in office, and much deregulation, ‘the needle has barely budged on U.S coal mining employment’. His announcement that ‘the coal industry is back’, delivered perversely to a room made up of many out-of-work coal miners in West Virginia, is simply not reflected in the data. How long will he persist? Ever since his election, Trump has been resolutely swimming against the tide. The coal industry dying for good reason, and there is little that can be done about it. The sector is an inefficient creator of jobs, and because of the increased costliness of transportation and general production, getting less and less competitive in the marketplace. And that is ignoring the environmental costs, which are so severe they are difficult to fully quantify. If Trump were sincere in his promise of putting Americans back to work, renewables would figure high on his agenda. That is where the future lies; it is folly to think otherwise. The fossil fuel lobby, however, has infiltrated deep into his government and gained a controlling stake. A former coal lobbyist actually heads up the Environmental Protection Agency in what appears to be a staggering conflict of interest. Sound energy policy now looks like it will have to wait for Trump to depart office. Until then, it remains to be seen how long his obsession with coal will last, despite the mounting evidence exposing its stupidity. How much money will need to be wasted? How many reports need to be published that point to better, greener alternatives to throwing money down a mine? Alas, like most predictions with this capricious, callous, and careless President, all bets are off.
Along with a border wall and vague promises of greatness, one of Trump’s key campaign pledges was to bring back jobs to the American people. He situated himself, in contrast to Clinton, as the protector of the everyman, a mystical demographic that were at the mercy of the Chinese, their jobs being poached from right under their noses. His plan – as far as he ever articulated it – was predictably grandiose, and in part based on the resuscitation of the dying coal industry. The mines, he promised, would be brought back, en masse, bringing with them jobs and prosperity. His envisioned ‘greatness’ was to arrive accompanied by thick, black, environment-threatening, smog.
What's the difference between a conference, a seminar, a workshop and a symposium?
This article was originally published on Conference Monkey and has been syndicated to our sister websites. If you're looking for a conference to head to this year, check out our conference listings on Conference Monkey. Moreover, the difference between a conference and a seminar may be that a conference has a more general theme with a focus on presentations and lectures, whereas a workshop is usually more specific and hands-on, so to speak. However, as we'll see there are grey areas between these types of events, and the line isn't always clear. Really, what's important is that everyone has a good time and learns something. Nonetheless, it's good to know exactly what you're getting into, especially if you're actually presenting a paper or giving a lecture. So let's dive into the specific differences between a conference, a seminar, a workshop, and a symposium. What's a conference? Conferences tend to be the largest events vs. smaller workshops and seminars. They can number anywhere between fifty attendees to thousands of attendees, and the largest may host even more visitors that that. You'll come across both national and international conferences – national conferences are typically attended primarily by people living within the country which is hosting the event, while international conferences can attract visitors from all over the world. Conferences tend to be the most prestigious forms of events as well, so they are the place where you most want the opportunity to present your work as a talk or as a poster. Speaking of which, conferences will usually involve a number of talks by prominent speakers in addition to poster sessions where researchers present their ideas and data in a visual format. When you attend a poster session, you can walk around and look at each of the different posters and stop to chat or to ask questions of the presenter as well. Presenters will stand next to their poster and will often have a short 5-10 minute explanation of the poster which they will give to anyone who asks. If the conference is a large one, you will find concurrent events. This means that there might be two, four, or even more talks happening at the same time in different locations. You need to be organised to find out when and where the talks you want to see are being held, and you should make good use of your conference timetable which will hold all of this information. If you're planning on attending a conference this year, check out our insight into 10 hacks for a better conference experience. What's a seminar? The difference between a seminar and a workshop is that a seminar tends to be held within one institution or university, and will often a seminar will be a small group of people – say, between five and ten attendees – who come together to focus on a particular issue. Often seminars will be less formally structured than conferences, so one person might give a presentation but it will probably be brief. There is more of a focus on discussion at these events, so do feel free to chime in with your thoughts on the topic at hand. Another difference between a seminar and a conference is that while conferences usually last for between a few days and a week, seminars will be much shorter. They may be for an hour or two in the afternoon rather than lasting all day. Some departments will organise regular seminars, so for example you might meet on the first Monday of every month. Seminars are a great place to test out some new ideas or theories that you've been thinking about but aren't 100% confident with yet. If you're working on a concept or an idea for an experiment but you want to hear some feedback on it before you develop it further, offer to present it at a seminar. This kind of small group is perfect for getting honest feedback and you might even get some suggestions for improvements to your ideas. Check out our insight into tips for a more interesting and memorable conference presentation if you're planning on presenting at any of these types of events this year. What's a workshop? The difference between a workshop and a conference is that workshops are generally smaller than conferences, and are usually only a day or two long and are dedicated to discussing a specific topic. Although these events are held as part of a department, you will often find outside visitors who attend them too. The atmosphere is somewhere between a seminar and a conference, meaning it is less structured than a conference but more formal than a seminar. Workshops are also sometimes more diverse in terms of attendees than other events. You'll find people from different departments and fields attending workshops together, and you may find non-academics such as journalists or people in business will attend too. The best workshops have a specific, action-oriented purpose, and aim to generate some concrete answers to current problems in the field. Workshops are a good opportunity to learn new skills and to familiarise yourself with a topic you don't know well. If this piece has inspired you to apply to a conference, workshop, symposium or seminar, read our piece on how to get accepted to an academic conference. What's a symposium? The main difference between a symposium and a conference is that a symposium tends to be similar to a conference, but smaller. The definition of a symposium isn't completely clear – the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary describes it simply as 'a small conference'. However, similarly to a workshop, a symposium tends to focus on a particular issue rather than a more general theme. Generally a number of experts will come together in order to present their ideas and papers to one another. Similar to a conference in that the focus is on presentations and lectures, and less hands-on than a workshop, a symposium is typically completed in a single day. Symposiums may be more prestigious than a conference, with an emphasis on experts presenting their work and occasionally discussing it afterwards (though not to the extent of a seminar). Finally, symposiums will generally be smaller than a conference. Saying all this, it's likely you'll visit a symposium that seems more like conference and a workshop that could easily be called a seminar. The difference isn't always clear, and there's usually some grey area. What's important is that you learn something while you are there, and get to listen to some of the leading experts in their fields discuss their work.
There are lots of different types of academic event that you might want to attend, such as conferences, seminars, workshops and symposiums. Each has its own benefits and drawbacks, and generally they have a different slant. Size, for instance, is usually a big factor in whether something is regarded as a conference or a symposium. Usually the difference between a conference and a symposium is that a conference will be a larger event and a symposium a smaller one.
If you're thinking of going travelling but want to check out some Master's programs at the same time, take a look at our program listings. Set up a Virtual Private Network A virtual private network, or VPN, is a service that makes it safe and secure to use the Internet anywhere you happen to be. It does this by sending your connection through a server that hides what you're doing online. VPNs can be used wherever your travels take you and any data you use or create will be encrypted. That way no one can identify your computer, access your school data or steal your personal information. Make sure you're familiar with how VPNs are used in the countries you travel and be prepared for any technological or legal limitations in those places. Find an online study program Clearly a traditional program won't allow you to skip class and travel as the whim takes you. For that reason, you'll need to find an accredited and reputable online Master's degree program that you can access anywhere. There are many programs of this sort based out of many colleges and universities across the globe so do your research and find the one that best fits your area of study and your needs as you travel. Combine your itinerary with course requirements Whether you're traveling for work, pleasure or as a member of the military, look through the course requirements as you plan your trip itinerary. You will want to create an easy week if you have exams or a paper to write; don't pack your travel with sightseeing or constant meetings during these times! When you have an intense of week of study ahead of you, try to schedule more downtime or stops in relaxed locations where you'll have the time to get down to business when it's important. Pack the right materials You don't want to find yourself hundreds or thousands of miles from home without the materials you need to do your coursework. Make sure you have packed all relevant books, papers, and software you'll need to keep track of and complete your studies when you're away from home. In addition to that, you'll also want to make sure you have your laptop, smartphone, pencils, pens, notebooks, and any other supplies to help you study. You may want to subscribe to an online library so you can do research even if you can't get to a brick and mortar library. Enjoy the benefits The biggest perk to traveling while you do your Master's degree is the freedom to see the world and complete your bucket list without having to give up your ambitions when it comes to your education. While you travel, you will also be gaining worldly experience that will supplement your field of study and give you valuable skills and experiences you can include on your resume when you're ready to find a job using your Master's degree. Online classes are generally small, giving you a closer relationship with your instructor and peers so you can get the most out of your studies even if you're busy traveling. Understand the drawbacks As with anything, there are some cons to consider when you travel and complete your Master's degree at the same time. While they probably aren't serious enough to deter, it makes sense to understand the possible drawbacks so you can put a plan into place to deal with them. When you're travelling, you might find it hard to find the motivation to take the time to study and do your coursework. You will need to create a doable schedule that includes time for school so that you don't feel that you're missing out when you travel, but so you also don't get behind. Another possible drawback is that it could be hard to find an appropriate place to study when you aren't familiar with your location. Research each destination on your itinerary so you can find coffee shops, hostels geared for students, or libraries where you can settle in and get work done. Pay attention to time zones This is important as your work will have deadlines and you'll need to make sure you know what time it is where the assignment is due so that you get it turned in on time, regardless of where you happen to be at the time. Don't miss any deadlines because you thought you were five hours behind, but you were actually five hours ahead! Studying online is a prime way to have the freedom to travel and gain world experiences as you earn your Master's degree. Being prepared for everything you'll encounter means a smooth ride and enjoyable and productive travels. Bon voyage!
Having a Master's degree is a valuable way to advance your career and gain more knowledge in your chosen field. Unlike an undergraduate degree program, you may not have to go to school full time to achieve this step in your education. However, it does require some time and effort, which means you'll need to figure out how to fit it in with your lifestyle. If that lifestyle includes travel as a priority, you may wonder how you can complete your Master's without giving up your travel schedule. The good news is that you can do both. It won't be the conventional way to graduation that most post-grad students follow, but it can be done and you'll enjoy the freedom to travel while also completing your degree. Here's what you should know.
Universal Basic Income: a panacea for society's ills?
Browse our job listings for more opportunities Its popularity has risen in correlation with the increasing economic inequality that is now endemic across Europe, and whose spread, political tinkering has done little to inhibit. For their failure to address this widening gulf, centrist parties of the left and right have been punished at the polls, and politics has polarised. Electorates and experts, alike, have begun casting their eyes further afield for something more radical, something more transformative to address the crises in which societies are mired. Many have alighted on UBI as one such solution. But what exactly is Universal Basic Income? And what do its proponents say about it? UBI is cash payment delivered, periodically, to all individuals, without means testing, and regardless of employment status. The income is considered a right, and there are no restrictions placed on what it can be used for. There also exist variants on UBI, differentiated by those who are entitled to receive payment, called, simply, a Basic Income (BI) - context, generally, dictating the restriction. The following is a contemplation on the potential of such policies. Offsets technology-induced and stressful state of unemployment As technology advances with ever-growing rapidity more and more jobs are being lost to robots and algorithms. People entering the workforce now, unlike previous generations, are told to expect multiple career changes in their lives, and to brace themselves for periods of unemployment or low income whilst in between professions. For some, this reality is already being felt, and it's not a pleasant one. There is much research that shows enforced profession change, as will soon be completely mundane, can be psychologically very damaging. An issue compounded by the financial scarcity that is often its by-product. UBI would ease this stressful transition, allowing the jobless to get back to their feet while retaining their dignity, find suitable new work or training, and eventually restart contributing to the economy. The removal of absolute scarcity during this interim period has been shown to facilitate better decision-making by the individual - reducing rashness and encouraging a closer consideration of the longer term. The power to rejuvenate Sceptics of the proposition often question how society could justify giving free money to drug addicts, alcoholics, and ex-criminals, as they would be guaranteed under UBI. On this count, the evidence actually points to UBI having largely positive effects. A trial in Liberia revealed that many addicts and criminals who received UBI, rather than squandering their money as many presumed they would, spent their monthly endowments on subsistence and what the study described as ‘legitimate enterprise’. Similarly, in Give People Money, Journalist Annie Lowrey, identifies a UBI pilot in a small village in Kenya as producing the same results. Before the pilot, the village was made up of dirt roads, had little access to electricity and ran a largely open sewage system. Midway through – the program is ongoing – and the village has been transformed, almost unrecognisable, and is now a prime example of what Lowrey calls innovative entrepreneurship. Both of the above examples speak to an interesting psychological quirk that is often revealed in the discussion of UBI. Namely, when asked about its viability individuals tend to think that although they themselves would put their grant to good use, the initiative would fall down because of the profligacy of others, who are likely to make ill-advised, wasteful choices. In actual fact, when put into practice, UBI has consistently shown that people, irrespective of background, tend to be impressively shrewd when putting their money to use. Reduction in ever-growing bureaucracy In most states, there exist countless governmental organisations responsible for helping those in poverty, handing out unemployment benefits, food stamps, etc. The running of such sprawling, intertwining welfare programs is expensive, time-consuming, and often complicated for both administrators and recipients. A simple cash payment directly to the individual would cut down on this bureaucracy. To give some sense of scale, in the US there are 79 different means-tested programs. To the pleasure of all those concerned with reducing government and red tape, all these could all be scrapped with the introduction of a UBI. Tackling domestic abuse Less publically discussed, but of equally vital importance is its power to tackle abuse. To society’s embarrassment, domestic violence remains prevalent wherever you go. Those who suffer abuse - the majority of which are women - often remain trapped in violent situations, lacking the financial means needed to escape. By ensuring a certain level of financial independence, as UBI would provide, the process of leaving an abusive partner would be simplified. It is unclear how many people currently suffering in silence this could help. Empowering workers Those on the left see UBI as an opportunity to empower the working class, providing them with what historian Rutger Bergman has called ‘real freedom’. For him, this freedom is predicated on the ability to say no, a privilege currently enjoyed exclusively by the rich. UBI, he believes, would give individuals the ability to say no to jobs they didn’t want, to cities they no longer wanted to live in, and to employers who treated them unfairly – that ‘is what real freedom looks like’. Additionally, the redistribution of wealth would provide workers with greater bargaining power. As Annie Lowrey has questioned, ‘why take a crummy job for 7.25 an hour when you have a guaranteed 1,000 dollars a month to fall back on?’ In such a situation, employers would be inclined to take seriously the demands of their workforce, and improving working conditions would likely follow. The future of UBI In many people’s minds what is still lacking is a satisfactorily long, randomised trial of UBI, run with a sufficiently large pool of people. Currently, empirical proof of its long-term success or lack thereof simply does not exist. Even the much-hyped trial recently concluded in Finland, lasted just two years, focused only on the unemployed, and has already been criticised for lacking the scale or ambition to really put UBI, or Basic Income, to the test. Nonetheless, with its promises of transferring not just money, but dignify, responsibility and power back to the people UBI remains a seductive prospect, and one certainly worthy of continued experimentation. Trials are being planned for places as far-flung as India, Iran, and Scotland, and it’s with great anticipation we wait to see how they fare. UBI may yet have its time in the sun.
As a policy, support for Universal Basic Income (UBI) flouts traditional political and social lines, making unlikely bedfellows of those on both the right and left wing. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, free-market evangelist Milton Friedman, and firebrand economist Yanis Varoufakis all count among its high profile, and rather disparate, champions. With the help of their advocacy the initiative has entered into mainstream consciousness, and widespread political discussion of its implementation, in contrast to a few years ago, is now readily had. Gone are the days in which UBI was simply dismissed as an unattainable utopian concept.
Economists are almost unanimous in their assessment that in this scenario the British economy would take a battering, and possibly slip into recession. Projections make for dismal reading and include a GDP depreciation of 9%, a drastic fall in house prices and a possible run on the pound. For most this is nothing new. Ardent remainers remind us of these forecasts on a daily basis, appearing to revel in the delivery of such gloomy predictions - project fear showing it has legs yet. Less, on the other hand, tends to be said of the damaging effects a ‘disorderly exit’ would have on the 27 remaining EU member states. Indeed, for those countries with high levels of integration with the UK economy, these effects could be severe. Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany stand out among those most at risk. Below we take a closer look at what each country can expect if, come March 31st, Britain leaves the EU with no withdrawal agreement in place, and reverts to WTO tariffs to regulate its trade. Ireland Worst affected of the EU27 countries is likely to be Ireland because of the highly integrated nature of the Irish and UK economies. Annually, Irelands’ trade with the UK is worth an estimated €65 billion, and sustains over 400,000 jobs on both islands. For this reason, the imposition of steep WTO tariffs on this trade; the huge increase in customs paperwork; and the risk of long delays on goods and shipments to and from the European mainland has got Irish businesses frantically preparing for the worst. And their fears seem to arranted. Only recently, the IMF predicted that Dublin would suffer a 4% hit to its GDP. Mainly, this is because two of the country’s top exports – meat and dairy products – would face some of the highest tariffs, as per WTO instruction. The price increase would be absorbed by the consumer and massively reduce the products’ competitiveness, meaning profits would tumble and businesses falter. Commenting on the consequences of no deal, Governor of the Central Bank of Ireland, Phillip Lane, warned that ‘the agri-food sector would be disproportionately affected, with a corresponding outsized [negative] impact on rural regions, especially near the Border.’ The economic damage, he cautioned, although unevenly distributed, would also likely be ubiquitous, every area of economic activity enduring at least some disruptive effects. And this, of course, is before even mentioning the backstop. The European Commission has made it clear that no deal would make the creation of a hard border unavoidable. There is widespread fear that anything but a soft border could destabilise Ireland’s highly sensitive peace process – a hard border compared, by one leading expert, as like re-opening a ‘gaping wound’. Netherlands Britain is the Netherlands' third-biggest trading partner and also stands to take a significant economic hit. A study from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development expects exports to Britain to fall by 17% if no withdrawal agreement is secured. Research published by the Dutch Court of Audit has fleshed out these claims, estimating that this would cost the Netherlands an estimated €2.3 billion by 2023. Acute disruption would be especially felt in port cities like Rotterdam whose docks, rail yards and warehouses handle nearly 1 million tonnes of goods moving to and from Britain every week. With increased customs inspections shipping and logistics companies are predicting that what currently takes a day to get to Britain could, post-Brexit, take almost two. For a system in which margins of error are customarily measured in minutes, this is a dramatic increase, and there is concern that the roads leading to the ports will quickly come to look like parking lots. At present, there is no overflow space for trucks unable to drive straight onto ships. Belgium Neighbouring Belgium is also bracing itself. Former Minister Johan Van Overtveldt has been explicit in his warnings, explaining: 'Belgium is the fourth exporter, in nominal amounts, into the UK, on a par with France, which is a much bigger country. And so, if Brexit goes the wrong way, in terms of the hard Brexit, it will hurt the Belgian economy very seriously.’ The Belgian government has told businesses that a no-deal Brexit could lead to the imposition of up to €2.2bn (£1.96bn) in extra tariffs on goods and the loss of more than 40,000 jobs. It intends to present a series of emergency Brexit legislation to parliament before the end of February to avoid any further Belgium’s finance minister, Alexander de Croo, has complained that the British need to finally decide what they actually want from negotiations. 'Over the last few months we’ve fallen from one surprise into another,' he said in an interview with radio-station De Ochtend. 'The only constant is that the British are masters at shooting themselves in the foot and creating associated chaos.' The scale of that potential chaos he made clear claiming that only 5,000 of the 25,000 Belgian companies that trade with Britain were ready for the customs checks that could follow Brexit. How this deficit will be handled remains to be seen. Germany Even the economic powerhouse Germany will face trouble. Currently, the country exports an array of industrial goods to Britain, including around 800,000 cars per year - 14% of all cars it produces domestically - which accounts for 20% of the country’s global exports. No deal would jeopardise at least 100,000 jobs, and economists have calculated that 15,000 workers in the German car industry - t close to one in ten - could be made redundant if WTO tariffs sprang up in Britain. The blow would be felt across much of the country but it would probably concentrate on high-tech manufacturing centres such as Wolfsburg, the home of Volkswagen, and Böblingen, a suburb of Stuttgart where Siemens and IBM are the leading employers. In a potential sign of things to come, the flow of German products to the UK has fallen between 6-8% since the Brexit referendum.
The Brexit clock is now deafening, and the British political and media establishments seem utterly consumed by its inexorable ticking. In the public realm, little else is considered, even less discussed. And yet, despite this obsession, with just 42 days before Britain departs the European Union, negotiations for a withdrawal agreement remain in deadlock, and the hopes of breakthrough seem to be fading. At the core of the dispute is the Irish backstop and, by proxy, participation in a customs union. On both, neither the Conservatives nor Labour appears capable of sincere compromise, favouring, instead, a game of high-risk brinksmanship. The stakes: the future of the country. By using the approaching deadline as leverage, aimed to cow opposition, Prime Minister Theresa May is gambling, big. And at the point of writing, it's unclear who will hold their nerve. Without concessions being made, Britain will crash out of the EU with no deal, with World Trade Organisation (WTO) tariffs beckoning.
No Deal Brexit and the Threat to Developing Countries
Chances of a Brexit deal fade Prime Minister Theresa May continues, with almost admirable obstinacy, to defy political convention, staggering on apparently blind to the repeated failures of her ailing administration. Her political capital on this issue has long been exhausted, a fact hammered home by the record-breaking rejection of her withdrawal agreement in Parliament – the last in a long series of nails in her coffin. It now seems highly unlikely that a May-led government could get any kind of Brexit deal through Parliament, such is her tarnished reputation. And for this reason, the dreaded 'no deal' edges closer, simply because anything else seems so improbable. Everything But Arms Developing countries have been watching this process as one would a slow-motion car crash: with a mixture of terror, powerlessness, and morbid fascination. Their concern revolves around the Everything But Arms (EBA) agreement, which currently permits the 49 Least Developed Countries to export to the European Union, duty and quota-free, with the exception - as the name indicates - of armaments. The initiative came into force in 2001 with the aim to encourage the development of the world’s poorest economies. Since its inception, it has been widely commended for ‘levelling of the playing field’. The simulations don't look good Brexit, however, threatens its practice. In both hard exit and a 'no deal' scenarios these vulnerable states would be denied access to the UK market through EBA, and the consequences, in some cases, could be dire. Simulations run by the German Development Institute (GDI), published earlier this month, have shown the impact various forms of Brexit would have on countries outside of Europe. In its results, Cambodia is forecast to take the 'heaviest blow'. At present, it sends 7.7% of its exports – mostly garments and footwear - to the UK. Kristen Hopewell, a lecturer at Edinburgh University, predicts that in the case of no deal and a reversion to World Trade Organisation rules, the country would simply be ‘priced out of the market’, becoming ‘collateral damage in the Brexit process’. As a result of increased tariffs, Cambodia’s GDP is projected to fall by 1.04%, and household consumption by 1.4%. The effects of this would be stark: the proportion of Cambodians living in extreme poverty would increase by around 1%, equating to over 150,000 people. Ethiopia is expected to endure a similar fate following a no deal. Its main exports coffee and vegetables would struggle to compete in the British market without the preferential treatment the EBA ensures. Competition from advanced economies would significantly diminish the UK demand for Ethiopian goods – a phenomenon generally known as ‘the trade destruction effect’. Estimates suggest this decline in trade, given the country’s economic dependence on the UK, would plunge an additional 1.12% of Ethiopians into extreme poverty. Bangladesh also stands to be hit hard, according to the report. Goods sold to Britain make up 9% of the country’s exports, the large majority of which are Ready Made Garments (RMG). Hannah Timmis, a researcher at the Center for Global Development, has predicted that under WTO regulations the already stricken country would see a $400,000,000 reduction in its exports - a huge blow to a fragile economy. Millions could be plunged into poverty Overall, the GDI simulation estimates that a 'no deal' Brexit could ‘increase the population living in extreme poverty in the EBA countries by nearly 1.7 million’. And this shocking assessment is actually thought to be a conservative one, because it does not take into consideration the knock-on effects of a damaged UK economy. British economic downturn, for instance, is likely to decrease state aid, foreign investment and remittances, all, at the very least, in the short term. Many of the EBA countries are dependant on these sources of income for the maintenance of already-stretched systems of welfare and other vital national infrastructure. Without contingency plans, the consequences could be deadly. It is unsurprising that there is such concern. The government response Of course, it is possible that the UK government could act to ward off such outcomes, and pass legislation to replicate the EBA agreement, a process that would have to be carried out on a country-by-country basis, and, to avoid disruption and the diversion of trade away from developing countries, be secured by the 29 March. The general consensus is that these trade agreements will eventually be struck, as even outside of the humanitarian concern the UK’s economy also heavily relies on this business. What is far more doubtful is whether they will be reached on time. On this the GDI is sceptical, stating the ‘UK may draw up new free trade agreements with individual developing countries, but that is unlikely given the short notice and [if it did] it would limit the number of countries covered.’ There also exists the belief that as Britain has shown such flagrant disregard for its own economic welfare – a no deal would epitomise this – it would be irresponsible to expect it to treat others any differently. This, perhaps, is too cynical. People’s lives are reliant on UK trade. And it must be this that is at the centre of the decision making process. All must be done to avoid missing the 29th March deadline, and if that is not possible, then to strike deals as quickly as is possible. Unfortunately, in the uncertainty and unpredictability of current moment, nothing can be guaranteed.
In the cacophony of the Brexit debate the names Phnom Penh, Dhaka and Addis Ababa, if ever spoken, are rarely heard. And yet, with the March deadline looming on the not-too-distant horizon, and little, if anything, seemingly agreed upon, it is they who stand to be most affected, particularly if a no deal comes to pass. And things in that regard are not looking good.