Discover 67 opportunities in William Pearse

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.

With every passing day - and they seem to be whizzing by now – the likelihood of the UK leaving the EU without a deal, known as a ‘no deal Brexit’, is increasing. For the large majority, the prospect of this is nightmarish. In the event, it is widely understood that there would be a number of inevitabilities: the economy would slump, possibly crash; many businesses would flee, and with them whatever tax receipts they hadn’t yet evaded; and the Tory hard right would sit back and revel. That only a handful of MPs and a slither of the broader population actually desire this, testifies to the failure of parliament, and more so, the failure of government in dealing with the negotiations. For two years, it has concerned itself with little else, shelving manifesto pledges to deliver the country here, to the now. And the situation, to put it lightly, is a shambles.

Responding to the success of our blogging article in our 2019 INOMICS Handbook – for those of you unacquainted, click here – the economists are back, answering more blog-oriented questions. This time around, we’ve taken a bit of a personal turn, quizzing our participants about their blogging successes; the concepts behind their writings; and their preferred reads. For those setting out on their economic journey, the following makes for essential reading

Climate change is back on the front pages of the world’s press – belatedly. Its return is thanks to the landmark IPCC report, published in October 2018, which has served as a brutal reminder of the dystopian future that awaits humankind if radical policy change is not enacted immediately.

The announcement of the Nobel Prize in Economics 2018 could not have been timed better. It took place just 24 hours after the release of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) stark warning that only 12 years now remain for global warming to be kept to a minimum of 1.5C, beyond which catastrophe looms. Rather appropriately, considering the admonishment, the gong was jointly awarded to Americans William Nordhaus and Paul Romer for their research into, as put by Swedish Academy, two of the most ‘basic and pressing’ economic issues of our time: ‘long-term sustainable growth and the welfare of the world’s population’.

Responding to the success of our blogging article in 2018r’s INOMICS Handbook – for those of you unacquainted, click here – the economists are back, answering more blog-oriented questions. This time around, we’ve taken a bit of a personal turn, quizzing our participants about their blogging successes; the concepts behind their writings; and their preferred reads. For those setting out on their economic journey, the following makes for essential reading.

The following is an analysis of data taken from the INOMICS Salary Report 2018 - downloadable for registered users here. Specifically, it looks at the representation and average salaries of both men and women, across all levels of seniority, in academia and the private sector. It is the 5th instalment in a series of insights handling the Report’s findings, and the first that seeks analysis through the prism of gender. The first four can be found in our insights section.

Responding to the success of our blogging article in this year’s INOMICS Handbook – for those of you unacquainted, click here – the economists are back, answering more blog-oriented questions. This time around, we’ve taken a bit of a personal turn, quizzing our participants about their blogging successes; the concepts behind their writings; and their preferred reads. For those setting out on their economic journey, the following makes for essential reading.

It is well known that blogging can be a useful, if not essential, tool for expanding networks, creating academic dialogue, and generally fomenting ideas. Alas, as wonderful as this may sound, like always, it is not always quite that easy. It also requires time, which tends to be tight; energy, at times lacking, and dedication. With this in mind, we wanted clarity; in practice, how can blogging benefit one’s work? And, what role can it play in the career development of an aspiring, young economist?

The reporting of British politics for journalists has rarely been so onerous. Dramatic landscape shifts in the form of u-turns, resignations, and unexpected elections, are now so frequent the lifespan of articles, previously measured in days, are better predicted in hours - sometimes just a handful. Last week’s rapid-fire resignations of Brexit Secretary, David Davis, and Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, over their intransigence regarding Britain’s Brexit strategy epitomised this difficulty. Following the double salvo, it looked, albeit briefly, as though anything was possible: a vote of no confidence; a leadership election; maybe even a general election. All bets seemed off.

Esteemed economist, blogger and friend of INOMICS, John H. Cochrane, kindly took time out of his busy schedule to take part in our Handbook questionnaire. However, this was no regular questionnaire, far from it. At its helm, assuming the role of quizmaster was none other than Mr Marcel Fratzscher: president of the DIW Berlin, and one of Germany’s leading voices in macroeconomics. Such is the reputation of these heavyweights we dubbed the encounter ‘Fratzscher v Cochrane’ – our personal nod to the pair’s professional standing.

With the world cup now over a week old, we have reached the moment when even those initially reluctant, those who decried it at its outset, give in to football frenzy and find themselves, at least twice a week, standing amid a crowd of similarly dressed strangers, screaming at 11 little men on a screen they can barely see. It is wholly inevitable, and few would disagree, thoroughly enjoyable.