Archive for the ‘Globalization & International Trade’ Category

2
Nov

The Fourth Sector Is Here to Stay

By Alejandro Erquicia, MIR 2017/2018 Student

Organizations today are more aware than ever of society’s demands and are adapting, at different speeds, to the changing context of our time. The level of interconnectivity the world has reached is such that citizens demand change. Society wants progress and knows that to resolve these issues we need organizations to abide by social principles while doing business. In such an environment, the Fourth Sector, mission driven for profit organizations, is expanding its reach and establishing itself as the way to do business in the years to come.

A deep dive into the unstoppable growth of the Fourth Sector was presented to all of IE academia by the Center for the Governance of Change, a research institution aimed at deepening our understanding of change and developing strategies to anticipate, govern and promote progress. The School of International Relations at IE University was presenting the initiative as one of its core areas of work. In a roundtable entitled The Fourth Sector & the Future of Social Entrepreneurship panelists shared some practices and experiences on these types of businesses. The conversation was of great interest for students and professors of the Schools of Business, Law and International Relations.

The Fourth Sector, which has moved beyond the antiquated three sector system of government, private sector and non for profit, addresses societal challenges blending the three sectors. It is not driven by profit maximization but conducts business, in all types of industries, with a purpose to make the world a better place. The key factors are that like non-profits, their primary purpose is to advance societal benefit and, like for-profits, they generate a substantial portion of their income from business activities.

There are indications that it could account for as much as 10% of GDP as well as nearly twice the job growth rate as traditional for-profit businesses in the US and Europe, said Heerad Sabeti, head of the World Economic Forum’s Fourth Sector Development Initiative during his intervention. He defended the job creation implications the Fourth Sector could reach and encouraged the furthering of the new system of operating which lies at intersection of the three traditional sectors.
On his behalf Sebastián Gatica, professor in Social Innovation at the Universidad Católica de Chile spoke about the need to further develop a supportive and conductive ecosystem from which the fourth sector could exponentially increase its presence since it’s an approach to see the future, and the world for generations to come, in a positive way. Alejandro Pachecho, Strategic Adviser at the United Nations Development Programme and Antonio Vives, Adjunct Professor at Stanford University, also shared their insights and discussed the challenges and opportunities of this new sector.

The Fourth Sector is a new international project supported by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the Ibero-American General Secretariat (SEGIB), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), that seeks to accelerate the establishment of a tailor-made ecosystem for social economy and for-benefit enterprises across borders. IE University will act as an academic partner in the project.

The Fourth Sector is here to stay. Businesses are transforming and can’t solely concentrate on Corporate Social Responsibility. More is needed and by focusing on the combination of doing good for the planet and having that approach to tackle the challenges we have, the social and economic returns will be noticed by all across the board.

Before closing the session Diego Rubio, Executive Director of the Center for the Governance of Change raised a question that surely left all thinking. If you were to receive two job offers, one working in the Amazon forest on tree preservation and the other working for a tobacco multinational in the US that paid five times more, which one would you take? Food for thought.

5
Sep

Kuwait, a small country in the Persian Gulf, holds the sixth spot on the global GDP per capita ranking, with an average per capita income of over US$ 69,000 in 2015, adjusted at the purchasing power parity. At the same time, it ranked only 34th in the World Economic Forum’s 2015-2016 Global Competitiveness Index (GCI).

New Zealand, another relatively small country both in size and population, has a per capita wealth which is roughly only half that of Kuwait — a little over US$ 34,000 at the purchasing power parity, 35th place in the world. Nonetheless, New Zealand scored visibly higher in competitiveness, ranking 16th in the GCI.

Clearly, the two economies and their structures are not directly comparable. Kuwait’s heavy dependence on natural resource revenues (over 90 per cent of exports) provide for such a lush per capita value, while New Zealand’s GDP is stimulated primarily by services that dominate the local economy, at over 69 per cent. Competitiveness, both as a notion and an index, arguably transcends countries’ idiosyncrasies in relation to their economies’ compositions. Competitiveness is ultimately reliant on a set of universal and comparable parameters. Therefore, a logical question arises: why does this mismatch and others of similar nature happen?

Our tradition of measuring and understanding development and related components such as competitiveness has been dominated by the economic agenda. Conventionally, GDP and its derivatives have been employed to describe and substantiate changes in development. Often, they have revealed clear and important trends that can be useful when approaching policy implementation. For example, the World Economic Forum highlights that GDP per capita is highly correlated with GCI in large cross-county comparison.

Our own analysis has confirmed that GDP explains 69 per cent of the variation in GCI scores across 146 countries when both indexes are taken as averages for three years from 2014 to 2016 and an exponential model is used. At the same time, however, and exemplified by the above comparison between New Zealand and Kuwait, GDP per capita might not necessarily capture the full complexity of the nature of competitiveness at the macro level. Read more…

Published on Sept. 1st in https://www.weforum.org
Mark Esposito

Fellow, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge

Artem Altukhov, MIR Alumnus 2017

Alejandro Pereda Shulguin, MIR Alumnus 2017

12
Dec

The long wave unfurled at last. Perhaps it is no surprise that the two societies that felt its furious force — the United States and Britain — are also the open societies at the hub of globalized turbo-capitalism and finance. For at least a decade, accelerating since the crash of 2008, fears and resentments had been building over the impunity of elites, the dizzying disruption of technology, the influx of migrants and the precariousness of modern existence.

In Western societies, for too long, there had been no victories, no glory and diminishing certainties. Wars were waged; nobody knew how they could be won. Their wounds festered. The distance between metropolis and periphery grew into a cultural chasm. Many things became unsayable; even gender became debatable. Truth blurred, then was sidelined, in an online tribal cacophony.

Jobs went. Inequality thrust itself in your face. What the powerful said and the lives people lived were so unrelated that politics looked increasingly like a big heist. Debacle followed debacle — the euro, the Iraq War, the Great Recession — and their architects never paid. Syria encapsulated the West’s newfound impotence, a kind of seeping amorality; and, in its bloody dismemberment, Syria sent into Europe a human tide that rabble-rousers seized upon. Read more…

www.nyt.com

23
Sep

Near the beginning of President Barack Obama’s final speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday morning, he pointed out something really important about the world today: We are living through the best time in human history, but it feels to a lot of us like anything but.

“This is the paradox that defines our world today: A quarter century after the end of the Cold War, the world is by many measures less violent and more prosperous than ever before. And yet our societies are filled with uncertainty and unease and strife,” Obama said.

This isn’t just a one-off observation on his part. It actually speaks to something very fundamental, and underappreciated, about the nature of the world we live in. We have set up a series of institutions that order the world — ranging from NATO to the global free trade regime to the UN itself — and have helped make the world better for most people.

But not everyone. Some people have suffered tremendously from the way the world is ordered — and it’s helped create a broader sense of social and global crisis.

 Obama’s speech, then, is an implicit recognition that how this paradox gets resolved — if the real suffering of the few can be alleviated without sacrificing the gains of the many — will play a major role in shaping his how tenure in office is perceived. Read more…
 
3
Sep

Having Britain as an additional party to a U.S.−EU free-trade agreement would benefit all sides.

U.S. President Barack Obama cautioned that the United Kingdom would be at the ‘back of the queue’ for a trade agreement with the United States if the country chose to leave the European Union. But in the post-Brexit world a deal might be struck more swiftly. Various ideas for bringing Britain and the United States into a formal trade arrangement have been floated. These range from a bilateral UK-U.S. trade deal, to the United Kingdom joining the North American Free Trade Agreement that connects the United States with Canada and Mexico, to Britain being a party to the the Trans-Pacific Partnership that the United States hopes to seal with 11 other countries along the Pacific Rim.

One option stands out from the rest: opening the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, to the United Kingdom after Brexit. The United States and European Union are currently negotiating TTIP. Read more…

By Marianne Schneider-Petsinger
August 30, 2016

 

1 2 3 43

We use both our own and third-party cookies to enhance our services and to offer you the content that most suits your preferences by analysing your browsing habits. Your continued use of the site means that you accept these cookies. You may change your settings and obtain more information here. Accept