Fluent Essays

this is a power point presentation. I will give you some questions to focus on and please add whatever you think is suitable for the presentation. as well as Im attaching the reading list for this topic. please Harvard referencing and add in text citations where needed. I would like it to be easier to read as it is a power point presentation. if you could please write it as sort of a presentation format it will be very helpful. here are some questions that were added to guide the readings.  Do you think the state can carve out a role for itself between the two poles of socialism and laissez-faire? - Why does governance matter for economic development of a country? - What are the origins of ‘good governance’ as a concept? And what are its main critiques? - What are the commonly used indicators of good governance? - Does progress in the above indicators guarantee more successful economic development of a country? I should speak for around 10-15 minutes and my part is going to be the body and conclusion.Data/PresetImageFill3-13.jpg Data/PresetImageFill2-12.jpg Data/PresetImageFill1-11.jpg Data/PresetImageFill5-15.jpg Data/PresetImageFill4-14.jpg Data/PresetImageFill0-10.jpg Data/bullet_gbutton_gray-16.png Index/Document.iwa Index/ViewState.iwa Index/CalculationEngine.iwa Index/DocumentStylesheet-3383.iwa Index/AnnotationAuthorStorage.iwa Index/DocumentMetadata.iwa Index/Metadata.iwa Metadata/Properties.plist Metadata/DocumentIdentifier 7306C3CD-0886-48A4-9658-00A1A6DB671A Metadata/BuildVersionHistory.plist docx M7.1-5683-2 preview.jpg preview-micro.jpg preview-web.jpgWIDER Working Paper 2016/1 The state, the market, and development Joseph E. Stiglitz* January 2016 * University Professor, Columbia University, New York, US; for queries please contact: [email protected] This paper was presented as a Keynote at the UNU-WIDER 30th Anniversary Conference on ‘Mapping the Future of Development Economics’, held 17–19 September 2015 in Helsinki, Finland, as part of the UNU-WIDER project on ‘Development Policy and Practices—Competing Paradigms and Approaches’. Copyright © UNU-WIDER 2016 Information and requests: [email protected] ISSN 1798-7237 ISBN 978-92-9256-044-7 Typescript prepared by Lesley Ellen. The United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research provides economic analysis and policy advice with the aim of promoting sustainable and equitable development. The Institute began operations in 1985 in Helsinki, Finland, as the first research and training centre of the United Nations University. Today it is a unique blend of think tank, research institute, and UN agency—providing a range of services from policy advice to governments as well as freely available original research. The Institute is funded through income from an endowment fund with additional contributions to its work programme from Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Katajanokanlaituri 6 B, 00160 Helsinki, Finland The views expressed in this paper are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute or the United Nations University, nor the programme/project donors. Abstract: The state has played a major role in the most important developmental successes. This paper discusses the advances in our understanding of the role of the state in the developmental process over the past thirty years, and the contribution to those advances played by changes in economics, changes in the world, and key experiences (in particular the successes in East Asia and the failures in the countries pursuing Washington Consensus policies). Keywords: state, Washington Consensus, industrial policies, development, inequality Acknowledgements: This paper summarizes research on the role of the state in development conducted over the past thirty or so years. My earlier views were especially influenced by my work on the East Asia Miracle project (World Bank 1993; Stiglitz 1996; Stiglitz and Uy 1996); and I am especially indebted to Marilou Uy and John Page who worked with me on that project. My tenure as Chief Economist of the World Bank played a large role in shaping the evolution of these views, and I am deeply indebted to my many colleagues at the World Bank, too numerous to mention, for their insights, but I would be remiss if I did not mention Ravi Kanbur, Amar Bhattarcharya, and Jason Furman (who was particularly helpful in working with me on Stiglitz (1998a)). My more recent work on industrial policies and developGovernance as a Global Development Goal? Setting, Measuring and Monitoring the Post- 2015 Development Agenda David Hulme, Antonio Savoia and Kunal Sen Institute for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester Abstract The increasing realisation that governance quality is a fundamental element of long-run development has led to its con- sideration as a desirable development goal in its own right. To contribute to such a process, this article provides a framework to set, measure and monitor governance goals in the post-2015 development agenda. First, we assess whether existing cross-national measures on governance quality can be exploited to measure and monitor aspects of legal, bureaucratic and administrative quality. Such a ‘quick fix’ approach to measuring governance quality is fraught with challenges. The current practice of measurement is still subject to the short country coverage of most available measures, issues of comparability and legitimacy, as well as methodological shortcomings. Second, we argue that, in the long run, measuring and monitoring governance quality may require reconceptualising ‘good governance’ and designing internationally shared measures that are routinely provided by national statistical offices (but, international groups should also continue to make their independent measures). Finally, we consider the different approaches to set- ting governance goals, arguing in favour of a combination of national target setting and minimum standard with con- tinuous improvement. Policy Implications • Short-term, the task of measuring and monitoring governance goals is quite challenging and one should be mind- ful that existing indices are subject to short country coverage, issues of comparability and legitimacy, as well as methodological shortcomings. Hence, the interpretation of changes in governance in the future may be challenged both technically and politically. • Longer-term, since the idea of ‘good governance’ can be highly controversial, one should reflect on which dimen- sions and measures should be included. One approach is to consider the intrinsic value of good governance, which would give precedence to measures capturing state-society relations and accountability. The alternative is consider- ing the instrumental value of governance. In this case, the focus should be on state capacity; and measures of state administrative and legal capability would be a desirable starting point. • For setting governance goals, we recommend minimum global standards set for fixed dates, but all countries also to pursue improved measures on an annual basis line of argument. • Policy makers should be aware of the two main tasks involved in this exercise. Short-term, the setting of credible international targets that can contribute to improved governance. Longer-term, the setting in motion of processes that will create governance measurement as a routinised function in all national statistical offices (the creation ofGlobalization and the economic role of the state in the new millennium* Joseph Stiglitz This essay concerns the process of globalization, the integration of economies around the world which has put new demands on nation-states at the very same time that, in many ways, it has reduced their capacities to deal with those demands. The nation-state today is squeezed, on the one side, by the forces of global economics and, on the other side, by the political demands for devolution of power. 1. Introduction This essay concerns the process of globalization, the integration of economies around the world which has put new demands on nation-states at the very same time that, in many ways, it has reduced their capacities to deal with those demands. The nation-state today is squeezed, on one side, by the forces of global economics and, on the other side, by the political demands for devolution of power. 1.1 An example: the constraints imposed by globalization on taxation and redistribution An example of the constraints that have been imposed by globalization are the difficulties of taxation. With capital being movable from one jurisdiction to another, if one tries to impose a stronger taxation on capital, capital simply moves out. Ironically, just at the time that inequality has being growing—and it has grown enormously over the last twenty-five years—the ability to redistribute income through taxation of capital has been reduced enormously. 1.2 The contrast between nation-building 150 years ago and globalization today: the role of the visible hand At the time that nation-states were being formed 150 years ago, communication and transportation costs were falling; it is these same forces that have given rise to the process of globalization. A government was in place that helped regulate these processes of nation-building, of building national economies. Professor Alfred Chandler of Harvard who described the process of nation-building in the United States talked about the ‘visible hand’ (Chandler, 1977). It was not the ‘invisible hand’, but the ‘visible hand’ that helped shape the process of nation-building. Industrial and Corporate Change, Volume 12, Number 1, pp. 3–26 Industrial and Corporate Change 12/1 © ICC Association 2003 All rights reserved. *Originally presented as a lecture in Rome, January 2001. 1.3 Global governance without global governance Today, we have an analogous process of globalization, but we do not have global institutions that deal with its consequences. We have a system of global governance without global government. Worse still, just when the need for global institutions has never been greater, the confidence in the global institutions that do exist, like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization, has never been less. There is a yawning gap between the demands placed on our international institu- tions and what those institutions can perform. 2. The failure of the reform of the internati