World peace cannot be safeguarded without the making of creative efforts proportionate to the dangers which threaten it.
This was the idea behind the formation of the European Union which was initially formed by the ‘Inner Six’ countries like France, West Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg. The origins of the European Union sees its history of 70 years of war and unrest between France and Germany which led to the formation of ECSC(European Coal and Steel Community) under the SchumanPlan of pooling the coal and the steel of France and Germany. The European Union grew out of the aim to build a common political entity to undo the adverse effects of wars and to build up for an ‘internal single market’ with common laws and systems. It was culminated on 7th February 1992 under the Maastricht Treaty.
The Eurozone Crisis began in the year 2008 with a rise in debt of countries like Greece and Ireland. In 2009, Greece had a budgetdeficit of 12.9% of the GDP. That was more than 4 times of the limit suggested by the European Union which is 3%. The investors were discouraged. As a result, the investors sold the bonds of these countries to purchase the bonds of more credible countries like Germany and France. The uncertainty of the European Central Bank to act in such a situation led to a liquidity crisis and an erosion of the credibility of the European Union. Eurozone Crisis also demonstrated that it was the delayed collective action by the European Union that strengthened the ulterior motives of the Financial markets to make profits out of the difference in the bond prices of the different member states. The economic conditions in the year 2010 exposed the loopholes in the European Union’s foundation. There can be numerous reasons for this. They are as follows: –
Lack of a single currency – A single currency means a union or a political union but that is a distant dream as member states think that it would jeopardize their sovereignty.
No Federal European Government– Because of a no common governing body, there is no mechanism to set a central tax or budget policy. All member states under it are sovereign having their own political complexities in their respective countries.
No common Euro Bonds– Due to the lack of a common budgetary policies, well to do countries like Germany have rejected to subscribe to a common euro bond. They withdrew to underwrite Europe wide bond issues.
The United States Link-What happens in a country doesn’t stay in a country in the interconnected financial system of the world. The European Debt crisis was not just limited to Greece, but it had connection with the spending of the US government budget. US contributes approximately forty percent to the International Monetary Fund’s Capital. Waiving off the debts of Greece means adding additional burden to the Taxpayers in US.
Not just economic, Even Political Issues involved in emerging the Crisis. They are as follows: –
Austerity led to Protests: – The countries who were adversely affected by the Eurozone crisis switched to austerity. (Austerity is a set of political and economic policies which intends to reduce the government deficits either by increasing taxes or cuttingdown expenditure). Austerity leads to decline in the consumption and the employment rate of a country. A lot of protests occurred in Spain and Greece against the government because of the increased unemployment. Austerity measures even led to the removal of party in power in countries like Italy and Portugal.
Financially sound countries vs High Debt countries: – European Union saw a strain in the relationship between fiscally sound nations like Germany and the nations under high debt like Greece. Germany was not ready to ratify to a region wide solution rather pushed such countries to make changes in their budget policy. These situations might have led any of the member state to leave the Euro. There was a high possibility of the weakening of Euro against the other currencies in the global market. This crisis, indeed,witnessed the periodic weakness of the Euro.Slovakia andLithuania refused to bear the burden of Greece’s debt. Even these two countries resorted to austerity measures but without any aid from the EU.
Greece had manipulated its balance sheet to conceal its debts and it was also the result of long years of tax evasion, fiscal mismanagement and authorities misleading the reports.
The European Financial Stability Facility paid a bailout of 190 billion euros in the year 2011. It was only in the year 2014, that Greek economy was able to recover a bit and grew by 0.7% and successfully balanced the budget by selling its bonds. The crisis was not just limited to Greece.
Even Ireland’s banks borrowed loans from the housing market in the year 2008 which led to a huge debt crisis by 2010. $112 billion EU- IMF package was given to Ireland in exchange of following Austerity measures. This was again a severe Eurozone crisis with the Irish economy’s decline in output by 10% and Unemployment rising to 13% in the year 2010.
Portugal also received an aid of $116 billion in the year 2011 from the EU as it fell into recession as the deficit grew for about more than 10% of the GDP in the year 2009. Not just this, the deficit shifted to large countries like Italy and Spain too leading to an overall Eurozone crisis.
WHY DID GERMANY REFUSE TO ADJUST IN THE EUROZONE CRISIS?
Germany had the world’s largest current account surplus of almost 8% in the year 2017 (IMF 2018). And Regional Imbalances have led to the Balance of Payment crises (Schularick and Taylor 2012). Consequently, there had been a resentment against Germany in the international arena. But the following reasons can be the attributed why Germany didn’t behave accordingly: –
- Current account Surplus may not be always interpreted as beneficial to the economy. It indicates that investments in public and private sector has not been enough. (Bach et al. 2013, Sudekaum and Felbmayr 2017).
- With an intention to balance against Germany by reducing its current account surplus may not work. It may lead to their improved infrastructure, higher wages, higher inflation and also a higher consumption.
- With the rise in inflation, the debt burdendeclined, and the wages of the workers in the Non- Tradable Section rose. The High Export dependence of Germany on the foreign nations tarnished its image. Also, the current account surpluses are also related with net capital outflow.
The solution here was not to punish Germany but coming to terms with the fact that Internal Adjustment too, may not have positive consequences all the time. Moreover, A current account surplus was needed for an ageing country like Germany.
GREECE- LEARNING FROM THE MISTAKES OF THE EUROZONE CRISIS
Greece, which were the odd ones out in the Eurozone crisis and had its credibility crippled in the past ten years seemed to have learnt lessons. At present, it is one of the best performing countries in Europe with respect to flattening the Covid curve according to an analysis by the Bridge Tank. Not all perish in a crisis, few turn it into an opportunity.Kyriakos Mitsotakis, The Prime Minister of Greece along with the Sydney born Harvard immunologist Sotiris Tsiodras received praises for handling the Covid crisis. The deaths due to Covid was controlled unlike Italy which turned out to be a disaster.
According to Dr.Ladi, an expert whose field of study includes the Eurozone crisis and role of experts in the public policy said that “ Because of the previous crisis the people were better prepared to react and the country’s leadership worked very quickly compared to others who reacted late’’.
IS BULGARIA JOINING THE EUROZONE ANSWER TO IT’S PROBLEMS?
Bulgaria and Croatia are the latest Eastern European countries who are ready to adopt the Euro currency after meeting certain economic and regulatory criteria. This enlargement has come after a decade long of crisis which deterred the countries from joining. However, the inclusion of these two relatively poor countries may bring risks along with it. The Eurozone has already suffered much because of Greece’s rising debt which destabilized the entire currency in the former decade. Analysts have warned before hand only that the two countries in question may have a hard time in fulfilling criteria like Low Public Debt and the Rule of Law. Croatia is expected to increase its debt to 86% of the GDP by this year which is yet again above the 60% level that the European authorities accept.
Bulgaria joined the EU in the year 2007 and has expressed its intentions of joining the euro area since the year 2009 until the debacle in the form of Eurozone crisis occurred which hindered its entrance at the prevailing circumstances then. With the economic recovery in the year 2018, It again wanted to join the Euro Club. To join the club, it needs to fulfil two conditions: –
- It must join the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM ii) – a waiting room where a country introducing the euro is required to stay for a minimum period of two years at least.
- The Public Debt levels must not exceed 25% of the GDP (Bulgaria’s GDP here)
Few officials of the Eurozone have expressed their concerns and are quite apprehensive about Bulgaria in the zone. According to them, Bulgaria’s entry will do no good or rather repeat the ‘Greek scenario’. Besides this, Bulgaria also must fulfil the ‘additional’ requirements of joining the Banking Union which was not a requirement before but would be implemented from now onwards. Joining the Banking Union means the scrutiny of the Big Banks of Bulgaria. This is quite obvious with news of the collapse of the Biggest bank in Bulgaria in the year 2014. The European Central Bank is being a watchdog here and Banks in Bulgaria have been given time to create additional capital buffers till April 2020. It must be noted that the FI Bank has still not fulfilled the criteria.
There are other factors as well which act as an instrument to demotivate Bulgaria to the Eurozone. Those are as follows:-
- No adequate support from the public for the introduction of Euro in Bulgaria.
- The EU area crisis is also a factor.
- Depiction of EU as a fading power.
- Bulgaria is also seen as an under- performing state and the common currency works in the interest of the third parties.
- Gaining domestic support and Anti – EU voices is much easier than in favour of it.
The Bulgarian government doesn’t want to escape this opportunity of joining the EU zone in the Corona crisis. It would be interesting to see whether it gets successful or not.
Today, in the times of Corona, The European Central Bank seems to have learnt from its past mistakes unlike the Eurozone Crisis. It has acted quickly and has kept the borrowing costs low for all countries in the Euro Zone because as per the forecasts done by IMF, the public debt will reach almost 100% of the GDP by the year end. To cope up with this, the head of the ECB, Ms. Christine Lagardesaid that economic implications of Covid- 19 would result in decrease in the supply chain by approximately 35% and would also expose us to a rise in the inequalities in the Euro- Zone. Factors such as Climate Risk and bio-diversity will be taken into account while drafting plans. The ECB also created a Pandemic Emergency Purchase Programme worth of € 750 billion involving both government and private debt. A decision regarding the same is to be made in the upcoming EU Summit which will be held on the 17 and 18th July 2020.
Carbon Market Could Drive Climate Action
Authors: Martin Raiser, Sebastian Eckardt, Giovanni Ruta*
Trading commenced on China’s national emissions trading system (ETS) on Friday. With a trading volume of about 4 billion tons of carbon dioxide or roughly 12 percent of the total global CO2 emissions, the ETS is now the world’s largest carbon market.
While the traded emission volume is large, the first trading day opened, as expected, with a relatively modest price of 48 yuan ($7.4) per ton of CO2. Though this is higher than the global average, which is about $2 per ton, it is much lower than carbon prices in the European Union market where the cost per ton of CO2 recently exceeded $50.
Large volume but low price
The ETS has the potential to play an important role in achieving, and accelerating China’s long-term climate goals — of peaking emissions before 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality before 2060. Under the plan, about 2,200 of China’s largest coal and gas-fired power plants have been allocated free emission rights based on their historical emissions, power output and carbon intensity.
Facilities that cut emissions quickly will be able to sell excess allowances for a profit, while those that exceed their initial allowance will have to pay to purchase additional emission rights or pay a fine. Putting a price tag on CO2 emissions will promote investment in low-carbon technologies and equipment, while carbon trading will ensure emissions are first cut where it is least costly, minimizing abatement costs. This sounds plain and simple, but it will take time for the market to develop and meaningfully contribute to emission reductions.
The initial phase of market development is focused on building credible emissions disclosure and verification systems — the basic infrastructure of any functioning carbon market — encouraging facilities to accurately monitor and report their emissions rather than constraining them. Consequently, allocations given to power companies have been relatively generous, and are tied to power output rather than being set at absolute levels.
Also, the requirements of each individual facility to obtain additional emission rights are capped at 20 percent above the initial allowance and fines for non-compliance are relatively low. This means carbon prices initially are likely to remain relatively low, mitigating the immediate financial impact on power producers and giving them time to adjust.
For carbon trading to develop into a significant policy tool, total emissions and individual allowances will need to tighten over time. Estimates by Tsinghua University suggest that carbon prices will need to be raised to $300-$350 per ton by 2060 to achieve carbon neutrality. And our research at the World Bank suggest a broadly applied carbon price of $50 could help reduce China’s CO2 emissions by almost 25 percent compared with business as usual over the coming decade, while also significantly contributing to reduced air pollution.
Communicating a predictable path for annual emission cap reductions will allow power producers to factor future carbon price increases into their investment decisions today. In addition, experience from the longest-established EU market shows that there are benefits to smoothing out cyclical fluctuations in demand.
For example, carbon emissions naturally decline during periods of lower economic activity. In order to prevent this from affecting carbon prices, the EU introduced a stability reserve mechanism in 2019 to reduce the surplus of allowances and stabilize prices in the market.
Besides, to facilitate the energy transition away from coal, allowances would eventually need to be set at an absolute, mass-based level, which is applied uniformly to all types of power plants — as is done in the EU and other carbon markets.
The current carbon-intensity based allocation mechanism encourages improving efficiency in existing coal power plants and is intended to safeguard reliable energy supply, but it creates few incentives for power producers to divest away from coal.
The effectiveness of the ETS in creating appropriate price incentives would be further enhanced if combined with deeper structural reforms in power markets to allow competitive renewable energy to gain market share.
As the market develops, carbon pricing should become an economy-wide instrument. The power sector accounts for about 30 percent of carbon emissions, but to meet China’s climate goals, mitigation actions are needed in all sectors of the economy. Indeed, the authorities plan to expand the ETS to petro-chemicals, steel and other heavy industries over time.
In other carbon intensive sectors, such as transport, agriculture and construction, emissions trading will be technically challenging because monitoring and verification of emissions is difficult. Faced with similar challenges, several EU member states have introduced complementary carbon taxes applied to sectors not covered by an ETS. Such carbon excise taxes are a relatively simple and efficient instrument, charged in proportion to the carbon content of fuel and a set carbon price.
Finally, while free allowances are still given to some sectors in the EU and other more mature national carbon markets, the majority of initial annual emission rights are auctioned off. This not only ensures consistent market-based price signals, but generates public revenue that can be recycled back into the economy to subsidize abatement costs, offset negative social impacts or rebalance the tax mix by cutting taxes on labor, general consumption or profits.
So far, China’s carbon reduction efforts have relied largely on regulations and administrative targets. Friday’s launch of the national ETS has laid the foundation for a more market-based policy approach. If deployed effectively, China’s carbon market will create powerful incentives to stimulate investment and innovation, accelerate the retirement of less-efficient coal-fired plants, drive down the cost of emission reduction, while generating resources to finance the transition to a low-carbon economy.
(Martin Raiser is the World Bank country director for China, Sebastian Eckardt is the World Bank’s lead economist for China, and Giovanni Ruta is a lead environmental economist of the World Bank.)
(first published on China Daily via World Bank)
The EU wants to cut emissions, Bulgaria and Eastern Europe will bear the price
In the last few years, the European Union has been going above and beyond in dealing with climate change. Clearly, this is far from being a case of disinterested endeavour to safeguard the planet and the environment. On the contrary, the EU’s efforts aim at reinforcing its “normative power”. In effect, the EU has gained some clout on the international stage, even vis-à-vis faraway countries like Vietnam and China. Yet, in doing so the Union embroiled in the apparent rush for more and more ambitious climate standards and targets. Therefore, Brussels needs to start acting and deliver on its promises to keep staying ahead of the pack. Even more so given US President Biden’s strengthened engagement with friends and foes alike on the climate and human rights.
Last week, the European Commission manifested its acknowledgment of this need by unveiling the Fit for 55 (FF55) growth strategy. Overall, this new, beefed-up Green Deal should reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 55% of their 1990 level by 2030. In some analysts’ view, the FF55 plan is a game changer in the long-term race towards climate neutrality alas. In fact, it could “both deepen and broaden the decarbonisation of Europe’s economy to achieve climate neutrality by 2050.” Moreover, they expect the FF55’s 13 measures to generate a number of positive ripple effects across EU economies.
True, wanting to reduce greenhouse gases significantly by 2030 and reaching net-zero-emission by 2050 goal is commendable under many regards. Still, the FF55 includes a number of measures that could impact ordinary people’s life massively across Europe. Nevertheless, the 27 Member States of the EU are responsible for as little as 8% of global emissions. As such, it is necessary to take a deeper look at how the FF55 will affect different countries and demographics.
The transition’s social cost
The realisation that reduction of capitalism’s dependence on fossil fuels will have serious socio-economic consequences is not at all new. Contrariwise, scholars and politicians have been outspoken about an indisputable “conflict between jobs and the environment”, since the early 1990s. Together, the pandemic-induced recession and the signing of the Paris Accord have brought the notion back on the centre stage.
Factually, pushing the energy transition entails facing mass lay-offs, generalised workforce retraining and taxes hikes on ordinary consumers. For instance, these hardships’ seriousness is evident in the progressive abandonment of coal mining for energy generation in the US. Moreover, the energy transition requires strong popular backing in order to be effective. Yet, measures pursued to achieve environmentally friendly growth tend to generate strong, grassroot opposition. Most recently, France’s gilets jaunes protests shows that environmental policies generate social discontent by disfavouring middle and lower classes disproportionately.
The poorest families and countries will bear the costs
One of the FF55’s main policy innovation regards the creation of a carbon trading market for previously exempt sectors. Namely, companies working int the transport and buildings sectors, be they public or private, will have to follow new rules. As it happened in the energy industry before, each company will have to respect a “carbon allowance”. Basically, it is an ‘authorisation to pollute’ which companies can buy from each other — but the total cannot increase. Despite all claims of just transition, this and other measures will have a gigantic, re-distributional effect within and between countries. And it will be of markedly regressive character, meaning that poorer families and countries will pay more.
Taxing transport emission is regressive
Historically, these sectors were trailing behind most others when it comes to decarbonisation for a variety of reasons. First of all, the previous emission trading system did not include them. Moreover, these are far from being well-functioning markets. As a result, even if the cost of emissions was to rise, enterprises and consumer will not react as expected.
Thus, even as they face higher costs, companies will keep utilising older, traditional vehicle and construction technologies. With taunting reverberations on those poorer consumers, who cannot afford to buy an electric car or stop using public transport. Hence, they “will face a higher carbon price while locked into fossil-fuel-based systems with limited alternatives.” Moreover, the EU could worsen these effects by trying to reduce the emission fees on truck-transported goods. Indeed, the commission is proposing a weight-based emission standard that would collaterally favour SUVs over smaller combustion-engine car and motorbikes.
In a nutshell, higher taxes and fee will strike lower-class consumers, who spend more of their incomes for transportation. Even assuming these households would like to switch to low-emission cars and buildings, current market prices will make it impossible. In fact, all these technologies ten to have low usage costs, but very high costs of acquisition. For instance, the cheapest Tesla sells at over €95,000, whereas a Dacia Sandero “starts at just under €7,000.”
Eastern Europe may not be willing to pay
At this point, it is clear that the FF55 plan will deal a blow to ongoing efforts to reduce inequalities. In addition, one should not forget that EU Member States are as different amongst them as they are within themselves. Yet, the EU is not simply going to tax carbon in sectors that inevitably expose poorer consumers the most. But in doing so it would impose a single price on 27 very diverse societies and economies. Thus, the paradox of having the poorest countries in the EU (i.e., Central- and South-Eastern Europe) pay the FF55’s bill.
To substantiate this claim, one needs to look no further than at a few publicly available data. First, as Figure 2 shows, there is an inverse relation between a country’s wealth and consumers’ expenditures on transport services. Thus, not only do poorer people across the EU spend more on transport, poorer countries do as well. Hence, under the FF55, Bulgarians, Croatians, Romanians and Poles will pay most of the fees and taxes on carbon emission.
Additionally, one should consider that there is also a strict inverse relation between carbon emissions and the minimum national wage. In fact, looking at Figure 3 one sees that countries with lower minimum wages tend to emit more carbon dioxide. On average, countries with a minimum salary of €1 lower emit almost 4.5mln tonnes of carbon dioxide more. But differences in statutory national wages explain almost 32% of the cross-country variation in emissions. So, 1.5 of those extra tonnes are somehow related to lower minimum salaries and, therefore, lower living standards.
The EU’s quest for a just transition: Redistribution or trickle down?
Hence, the pursual of a ‘just’ transitionhas come to mean ensuring quality jobs emerge from these economic changes. However, many of the FF55’s 13 initiatives may worsen disparities both within countries and, more importantly, between them. Thus, the EU has been trying to pre-empt the social losses that would inevitably come about.
From the Just Transition Fund to the Climate Social Fund
In this regard, the European Union went a step forward most countries by creating the Just Transition Fund in May. That is, the EU decided to finance a mix of grants and public-sector loans which aims to provide support to territories facing serious socio-economic challenges arising from the transition towards climate neutrality [… and] facilitate the implementation of the European Green Deal, which aims to make the EU climate-neutral by 2050.
Along these lines, the FF55 introduces a Climate Social Fund (CSF) that will provide “funding […] to support vulnerable European citizens.” The fund will provide over €70bln to support energy investments, and provide direct income support for vulnerable households. The revenues from the selling of carbon allowances to the transport and building sectors should fund most of the CSF. If necessary, the Member States will provide the missing portion.
The EU Commission may give the impression of having design the CSF to favour poorer households and countries. However, it may actually be a false impression. In fact, it is clear that the entire carbon pricing initiative will impact poorer household and countries more strongly. However, only a fourth of the carbon pricing system’s revenues will go to fund the CSF. The remaining portion will finance other FF55 programmes, most of which have a negative impact on poorer communities. Thus, despite the CSF, the final effect of the entire FF55 will be a net redistribution upwards.
Stopping a redistribution to the top
Nevertheless, there is a way to fix the FF55 so that it can work for poorer households and lower-income countries. Given that the CSF is too small for the challenge it should overcome, its total amount should be increased. In fact, the purpose of higher carbon pricing is in any event not to raise revenue but to direct market behaviour towards low-carbon technologies—there is thus a strong argument for redistributing fully the additional revenues.
Hence, the largest, politically sustainable share of carbon-pricing revenues from transportation and housing should ideally go to the CSF. In addition, the Commission should remove all the proposed provision that divert CSF money away from social compensation scheme. In fact, poorer families will not gain enough from subsidies to electric car, charging stations and the decarbonisation of housing. One contrary, “using the fund to support electric vehicles would disproportionally favour rich households.”
Finally, the allocation of CSF money to various member states should follow rather different criteria from the current ones. In fact, the Commission already intends to consider a number of important such as: total population and its non-urban share; per capita, gross, national income; share of vulnerable households; and emissions due to fuel combustion per household. But these efforts to look out for the weakest strata in each country could backfire. In fact, according to some calculations, a Member State with lower average wealth and lower “within-country inequality could end up benefiting less than a rich member state with high inequality.”
A number of well-known, respected economist have been arguing that environmental policies should account for social fallouts attentively. Goals such as emission reduction and net-zero economies require strong popular support in order for the transformation to succeed. Or at least, the acquiescence of a majority of the public. Otherwise, the plans of well-intentioned and opportunistic governments alike will derail. After all, this is the main lesson of the currently widespread protest against the mandating of ‘Covid passes’ and vaccines.
If the FF55 will deal poorer households a devastating blow, social unrest may worsen — fast. But as long as it will also hurt Eastern European countries as a whole, there is a chance. Hopefully, European parliamentarians from riotous Hungary or Poland will oppose the FF55 in its current shape. Perhaps, in a few years everyone will be thankful for these two countries strenuous resistance to EU bureaucracy. Or else, richer countries may force Central- and South-Eastern Europe to swallow a bitter medicine. Even though, whatever happens, Europe alone cannot and will not save the planet.
Entrepreneurialism & Digitalization: Recovery of Midsize Business Economies
Observe nations around the world, especially those with the largest numbers of IT professionals, rich and well-groomed government departments and their related agencies, with matured bureaucracies and unlimited numbers of computers but still no signs of thriving digital economies buzzing on global platforms. What is so mysterious about digitization of small medium businesses, smoothly leading to ‘virtualization of economies’ creating global bounce of trade? Well, it is surrendering to the realization that entrepreneurialism is the main driving engine of such challenges and not the herds of IT teams, deluxe bureaucracies and accountancy-mindsets.
What is a digital economy? It is definitely not when all businesses have websites and are all doing social media postings, at the outset understanding digitalization of a single enterprise is already a fine art, and to make it fly on global trade platforms is a science. Unless economic development teams can articulate, what is and how ‘virtualization of economies’ work, uplift and upskill vertical trade sectors and create an entrepreneurial bounce of trades’, the entire exercise of digitization might as well leave to early video game players or early grader IT personnel. Observe how The Silicon Valley and e-Commerce revolutions of the world never created by large IT teams, but categorically by “techie-entrepreneurs” of the day that in turn occupied millions of IT professionals and created hundreds of millions IT experts driving e-commerce of today. Of course, IT teams needed but in very reverse order.
Why is the digital economy an entrepreneurial economy? Digitization of the economy is simply not an IT exercise rather a strategic entrepreneurial maneuver of placing a midsize business economy on wheels using easily available digital platforms with abundance of software to choose from to make right entrepreneurial-based decisions to create creative bounce. The survival strategies for the post pandemic economies have less to do with accountancy-mindsets and bureaucratic attitudes, as it is all about entrepreneurial global age execution with superior digital performances.
Calling Entrepreneurial Business Mindsets: The new horizons beyond pandemic call for “simultaneous synchronization” a need to merge ‘mental-blocks’ the lingering ‘productivity-silos’ ‘digital-divides’ ‘mental-divides’ all such negative forces balanced with positive forces of ‘innovative excellence’ and ‘superior-performance’ thrown all in an entrepreneurial-blender to make a great progressive multi-flavored shakes. To mix and match with our realty checks of today and the blended calamites; Economy + SME + MFG + AI + VR + AR + Officeless + Remote + Occupationalism + Globalization + Exports + Upskilling, all in one single sandbox need progressive advancements with entrepreneurial guts and clarity of vision for any serious stable economic balance. If such were a monopoly game, printing of currency would be the norm.
National Mobilization of Entrepreneurialism: Needed are deep studies of the prolonged trajectory of entrepreneurial intellectualism spanning a millennia… the word ‘entrepreneurialism’ was only invented over a century ago… but our civilization was built on similar principles, driven and strong people. Declare an economic revolution as a critical cure to desolate periods and call the nation but will they listen? With credibility of institution and political promises tanked, audible to the populace now is the grind of mobilizations, thundering deployments of action packed strategies, but how do you fund them? National mobilization of entrepreneurialism is the hidden pulse of the nation, often not new funding dependent rather execution hungry and leadership starved, so what makes it spin? Entrepreneurial warriors
As if a silent revolution mobilized, the nouveau entrepreneurialism in post pandemic economy in action, where talents on wings of digitalization, flying on trading platforms, visible in smart data and shining amongst upskilled midsize economies. Lack of upskilling, lack of global-age expertise, and most importantly lack of entrepreneurialism is what keeps digitization of economies lost in the past. How naïve is it to believe post-pandemic economic issues some PR singsong election campaigns? Only deployment, execution, mobilization will be the message now acceptable by the billions displaced, replaced and misplaced workers, but what is stopping nations, their Ministries and trade groups to have all out discussions and table immediate action plans? Ouch, do not forget the entrepreneurial blood in the economic streams, exciting the bureaucracies and accountancy-mindsets. The next 100 elections over the coming 500 days will be full of surprises, but serious transformation for survival is inevitable, with or without upskilled ministries of commerce. Which nations and regions are ready to engage in this tactical battlefield of global-age skills? Study how Expothon Africa is in deployments with selected countries.
The deciding factors: Never ever before in the history of humankind,the economic behaviorism across the world suddenly surrendered to a single calamity, affecting the majority of the global populace suffering in prolonged continuity. The side effect of such complexity juxtaposed with technological access can bring sweeping changes to our assumed complacency. All traditional problem solving and conventional thinking styles now considered too dangerous to economic growth and social balances.
Recommendation and Survival Strategies: Discover and establish authoritative command on digitization and virtualization of economies, study more on Google.Allow micro-small-medium enterprises a tax-free window on the first USD$5-10 million revenues in exports, this will create local jobs and bring foreign exchange. Allow micro-small-medium enterprises free access to all dormant Intellectual Property, Patents rolled up due to lack of commercialization. Allow Academic Experts on innovative technologies and related skills on free voucher programs to the SME base to uplift ideas and special expertise. Optimization of telecommunication and internet structures worth trillions of dollars with global access at times completely ignored and wasted by wrong mindsets deprived of entrepreneurial undertakings. Allow micro-small-medium enterprises free full time MBA as 12 months interns so MBA graduates can acquire some entrepreneurialism while enterprises can uplift their ideas in practice.
“Allow Million qualified foreign entrepreneurs to park within your nation for 5-10 years under a special full tax-free visa and stay program. Which nations have qualified dialogue on such affairs? Bring in, land million entrepreneurs in your nation, and create 10 million plus jobs and new wealth in following years. Let your own institutions and frontline management learn how such economic developments created. Be bold, as the time to strategize passed now time to revolutionize has arrived”. “Excerpted from keynote lecture by Naseem Javed, Global Citizen Forum, Dubai, 2013.”
Allow National Mobilization of Entrepreneurialism Protocols mandated to engage trade and exports bodies. Allow National Scoring of entrepreneurialism to measure, identify and differentiate required talents. Digitize from top to bottom and sideways, futurism fully digitized and without real transformation, it is like a nation without any internet. Act wisely. Digitalization of economies without entrepreneurial minds is more like pre-pandemic archives of mostly failures. Needed are the economic revolutions, based on entrepreneurial meritocracy and national mobilization of midsize economy.
The rest is easy
ADB Calls for Just, Equitable Transition Toward Net Zero in Asia and Pacific
Asian Development Bank (ADB) President Masatsugu Asakawa today called for countries in Asia and the Pacific to take bold action...
Oil, acid, plastic: Inside the shipping disaster gripping Sri Lanka
It’s visible in satellite images from just off Sri Lanka’s coast: a thin grey film that snakes three kilometres out...
A question mark on FATF’s credibility
While addressing a political gathering, India’s external affairs minister S. Jaishanker made a startling lapsus de langue “We have been...
UNSC calls for ‘immediate reversal’ of Turkish and Turkish Cypriot decision on Varosha
The Security Council said in a statement released on Friday that settling any part of the abandoned Cypriot suburb of Varosha, “by people other than...
Biden Revises US Sanctions Policy
In the United States, a revision of the sanctions policy is in full swing. Joe Biden’s administration strives to make sanctions instruments more effective in achieving his...
Unleashing India’s True Potential
As India strives to unleash its true potential to rise as a global powerhouse, it is tasked with a series...
Demand for Investigation of COVID-19 gained momentum
Human history is full of natural disasters like Earthquakes, Floods, Fires, Vacanos, Drought, Famine, Pandemic, etc. Some of them were...
Economy3 days ago
Entrepreneurialism & Digitalization: Recovery of Midsize Business Economies
Middle East3 days ago
Greater Middle East may force China to project military power sooner rather than later
Americas3 days ago
Maximizing Biden’s Plan to Combat Corruption and Promote Good Governance in Central America
Middle East2 days ago
Chinese FM Wraps Up his Visit to Egypt
Intelligence2 days ago
USA and Australia Worry About Cyber Attacks from China Amidst Pegasus Spyware
Eastern Europe2 days ago
Latvia developed new tasks for NATO soldiers
Europe3 days ago
Anti-Macron protests underline classism, as corona protesters and gilets jaune join forces
Europe2 days ago
Belarus divorces from the Eastern Partnership: A new challenge for the EU Neighborhood Policy