Fiscal Policy and Economic Stability: Does PIGS stand for Procyclicality In Government Spending?

The Financial Crisis has hit particularly hard countries like Ireland or Spain. Procyclical fiscal policy has contributed to a boom-bust cycle that undermined fiscal positions and deepened current account deficits during the boom. We set up an RBC model of a small open economy, following Mendoza (1991), and introduce the effect of fiscal policy decisions that change over the cycle. We calibrate the model on data for Ireland, and simulate the effect of different spending policies in response to supply shocks. Procyclical fiscal policy distorts intertemporal allocation decisions. Temporary spending boosts in booms spur investment, and hence the need for external finance, and so generates very volatile cycles in investment and the current account. This economic instability is also harmful for the steady state level of output. Our model is able to replicate the relation between the degree of cyclicality of fiscal policy, and the volatility of consumption, investment and the current account observed in OECD countries.

Validity of Resting Energy Expenditure Predictive Equations before and after an Energy-Restricted Diet Intervention in Obese Women

11 p.

Uptake and factors that influence the use of 'sit less, move more' occupational intervention strategies in Spanish office employees

Background: Little is known about the types of 'sit less, move more' strategies that appeal to office employees, or what factors influence their use. This study assessed the uptake of strategies in Spanish university office employees engaged in an intervention, and those factors that enabled or limited strategy uptake. Methods: The study used a mixed method design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with academics and administrators (n = 12; 44 +/- 12 mean SD age; 6 women) at three points across the five-month intervention, and data used to identify factors that influenced the uptake of strategies. Employees who finished the intervention then completed a survey rating (n = 88; 42 +/- 8 mean SD age; 51 women) the extent to which strategies were used [never (1) to usually (4)]; additional survey items (generated from interviewee data) rated the impact of factors that enabled or limited strategy uptake [no influence (1) to very strong influence (4)]. Survey score distributions and averages were calculated and findings triangulated with interview data. Results: Relative to baseline, 67% of the sample increased step counts post intervention (n = 59); 60% decreased occupational sitting (n = 53). 'Active work tasks' and 'increases in walking intensity' were the strategies most frequently used by employees (89% and 94% sometimes or usually utilised these strategies); 'walk-talk meetings' and ` lunchtime walking groups' were the least used (80% and 96% hardly ever or never utilised these strategies). 'Sitting time and step count logging' was the most important enabler of behaviour change (mean survey score of 3.1 +/- 0.8); interviewees highlighted the motivational value of being able to view logged data through visual graphics in a dedicated website, and gain feedback on progress against set goals. 'Screen based work' (mean survey score of 3.2 +/- 0.8) was the most significant barrier limiting the uptake of strategies. Inherent time pressures and cultural norms that dictated sedentary work practices limited the adoption of 'walk-talk meetings' and ` lunch time walking groups'. Conclusions: The findings provide practical insights into which strategies and influences practitioners need to target to maximise the impact of 'sit less, move more' occupational intervention strategies.