975 resultados para welfare state - Finland
Resumo:
Title from cover.
Resumo:
WI docs no.: CHI 2.1:1968-1974
Resumo:
Volume numbering ends with v. 6.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
"May 1973"--P. [2] of cover.
Resumo:
1931-1941 Have Title: Transactions. for Transactions of the 1st-28th Annual Conference
Resumo:
Cover title
Resumo:
Report year irregular.
Resumo:
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2016-06
Resumo:
In order for policy makers to plan effectively for sustainable development, there is a need for measures of welfare that consider changes in the natural capital stock. Current measures based on conventional national accounting are flawed because they are based solely on flow measures and do not account for environmental effects. In this paper, we use an expanded measure of wealth to estimate the value of natural capital for Queensland. The state's stock of natural capital is valued at A$355.6 billion, of which non-timber forest resources account for 45.3%, ecosystem services 20.0%, and mineral resources 17.6%. This figure is a conservative estimate of the true value since some significant components such as the ecological and life-support functions of the environment are excluded. The estimates highlight the relative importance of different forms of natural capital and can be used to draw the attention of policymakers to the need to give adequate weight to the value of such services in decision-making processes. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Resumo:
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, West Germany was considered to be one of the world’s most successful economic and political systems. In his seminal 1987 analysis of West Germany’s ‘semisovereign’ system of governance, Peter Katzenstein attributed this success to a combination of a fragmented polity, consensus politics and incremental policy changes. However, unification in 1990 has both changed Germany’s institutional configuration and created economic and social challenges on a huge scale. This volume therefore asks whether semisovereignty still exists in contemporary Germany and, crucially, whether it remains an asset in terms of addressing these challenges. By shadowing and building on the original study, an eminent team of British, German and American scholars analyses institutional changes and the resulting policy developments in key sectors, with Peter Katzenstein himself providing the conclusion. Together, the chapters provide a landmark assessment of the outcomes produced by one of the world’s most important countries. Contents: 1. Introduction: semisovereignty challenged Simon Green and William E. Paterson; 2. Institutional transfer: can semisovereignty be transferred? The political economy of Eastern Germany Wade Jacoby; 3. Political parties Thomas Saalfeld; 4. Federalism: the new territorialism Charlie Jeffery; 5. Shock-absorbers under stress. Parapublic institutions and the double challenges of German unification and European integration Andreas Busch; 6. Economic policy management: catastrophic equilibrium, tipping points and crisis interventions Kenneth Dyson; 7. Industrial relations: from state weakness as strength to state weakness as weakness. Welfare corporatism and the private use of the public interest Wolfgang Streeck; 8. Social policy: crisis and transformation Roland Czada; 9. Immigration and integration policy: between incrementalism and non-decisions Simon Green; 10. Environmental policy: the law of diminishing returns? Charles Lees; 11. Administrative reform Kluas H. Goetz; 12. European policy-making: between associated sovereignty and semisovereignty William E. Paterson; 13. Conclusion: semisovereignty in United Germany Peter J. Katzenstein.
Resumo:
Fast pyrolysis of biomass is becoming increasingly important in some member countries of the International Energy Agency (IEA). Six countries have joined the IEA Task 34 of the Bioenergy Activity: Canada, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, UK, and USA. The National Task Leaders give an overview of the current activities in their countries both on research, pilot and demonstration level. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.
Resumo:
Hungary is one of the worst-hit countries of the current financial crisis in Central and Eastern Europe. The deteriorating economic performance of the country is, however, not a recent phenomenon. A relatively high ratio of redistribution, a high and persistent public deficit and accelerated indebtedness characterised the country not just in the last couple of years but also well before the transformation, which also continued in the postsocialist years. The gradualist success of the country – which dates back to at least 1968 – in the field of liberalisation, marketisation and privatisation was accompanied by a constant overspending in the general government. The paper attempts to explore the reasons behind policymakers’ impotence to reform public finances. By providing a path-dependent explanation, it argues that both communist and postcommunist governments used the general budget as a buffer to compensate losers of economic reforms, especially microeconomic restructuring. The ever-widening circle of net benefiters of welfare provisions paid from the general budget, however, has made it simply unrealistic to implement sizeable fiscal adjustment, putting the country onto a deteriorating path of economic development.
Resumo:
This paper investigates the impact of state subsidy on the behavior of the entrepreneur under asymmetric information. Several authors formulated concerns about state intervention as it can aggravate moral hazard in corporate financing. In the seminal paper of Holmström and Tirole (1997) a two-player moral hazard model is presented with an entrepreneur initiating a risky scalable project and a private investor (e.g. bank or venture capitalist) providing outside financing. The novelty of our research is that this basic moral hazard model is extended to the case of positive externalities and to three players by introducing the state subsidizing the project. It is shown that in the optimum, state subsidy does not harm, but improves the incentives of the entrepreneur to make efforts for the success of the project; hence in effect state intervention reduces moral hazard. Consequently, state subsidy increases social welfare which is defined as the sum of private and public net benefits. Also, the exact form of the state subsidy (ex-ante/ex-post, conditional/unconditional, refundable/nonrefundable) is irrelevant in respect of the optimal size and the total welfare effect of the project. Moreover, in case of nonrefundable subsidies state does not crowd out private investors; but on the contrary, by providing additional capital it boosts private financing. In case of refundable subsidies some crowding effects may occur depending on the subsidy form and the parameters.