Jeff Oliver (2011) working paper. Do not redistribute without author’s consent.
“In a globally integrated world, the actions of any one country have effects on others”(Stiglitz & United nations, 2010).
Introduction
On November 12, 2011 IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde met with Japan’s Minister of Finance, Jun Azumi. In the press briefing that followed she stated, “No country can be immune under the present circumstances and no matter how developed or how emerging or how far away it is, the countries are totally interconnected” (Transcript of Press Briefing with Christine Lagarde, 2011). The current level of economic interconnectivity across the world is not new (Martell, 2010, p.156). However, when scrutinized, the current recession seems to be promoting global action in a way that may be without precedent in some fashion.
The IMF released a report on April 16, 2009 entitled Global Recession to Be Long, Deep with Slow Recovery (Terrones, Scott & Cannan, 2009a). Multi-national recessions that are deep and long lasting are certainly not new (Terrones, Scott & Cannan, 2009b, p. 103); however, this report touches upon a few key issues which are quite germane to the outlook of the current recession. Terrones et al. point out that, historically, when ten or more nations have been in recession at the same time, the recession is “on average longer and deeper.” They also note that such recessions were typically accompanied by slower recovery with weaker growth of exports. This final observation, they observe, is especially true if the United States is also in recession.
Terrones et al. (2009b) also noted especially severe and long lasting recessions when a recession is associated with global downturn and financial crisis. This particular combination is rather uncommon in the time period of their observations (1960 onward). Of their sample of 122 recessions, only six fit those criteria (with five of those occurring in the 1990s and one in the eighties). The recovery time for these recessions was around two years. They were also typically severe in nature.
Furthermore, increased global interconnectivity may be playing a role in the recent trends in recession. One interesting observation is that “Recessions in the advanced economies over the past two decades have become less frequent and milder, whereas expansions have become longer, reflecting in part the ‘Great Moderation’ of advanced economies’ business cycles” (Terrones, Scott & Cannan, 2009b, p. 104). Also, recessions associated with financial crises have become more common since around the mid-1980s (Terrones, Scott & Cannan, 2009b, p. 113). One trend in the presence of increased global interconnectivity may be that recessions are becoming both less frequent and milder in general, but longer lasting and more severe when they do occur (in light of their likely association with financial crisis).
I subscribe to the opinion that “although no consensus exists on the precise definition of globalization, there seems to be a consensus that it is real and it is affecting the world in numerous ways” (Euro Indicators, 2007, p. 4).
In this paper, I seek to explore and draw connections between the way nations are interconnected and the actions of nation states and supranational entities (e.g., the UN, IMF, World Bank) during the current financial crisis. Many supranational bodies are calling for an unprecedented globally coordinated effort in response to the crisis. The call is being received in different ways by different nations. However, the call for inclusive global coordination raises a host of questions. How plausible is such a task? Does such a call for global coordination undermine national identity? Is a globally coordinated systematic approach the only way to approach the current recession? Is it the best way to approach the current recession? While there are many potential areas for discussion on such a topic, I seek to understand the way such an effort appears to be received by different nations and entities. I will also explore what would need to happen to successfully engage in that type of global coordination.
Optimizing global outcomes
Joseph Stiglitz is one proponent of globally inclusive systematic efforts in managing the effects of the current financial crisis. In many ways, there have been what he calls “unprecedented efforts to address the crisis” (Stiglitz & United Nations, 2010, p. 5). Soon after the crisis began, Stiglitz was called upon to chair a “Commission of Experts” in order to make recommendations to a globally inclusive UN summit. The summit was to focus especially on potentially negative impacts on developing countries, as it was feared their opinions “might otherwise be given short shrift” (Stiglitz & United Nations, 2010, p. xii).
The summary of the UN’s 63rd session held in July 2009 outlines the nature of the concern for developing nations.
The world is confronted with the worst financial and economic crisis since the Great Depression. The evolving crisis, which began within the world’s major financial centres, has spread throughout the global economy, causing severe social, political and economic impacts. We are deeply concerned about its adverse impact on development. This crisis is negatively affecting all countries, particularly developing countries, and threatening the livelihoods, well-being and development opportunities of millions of people. (United Nations General Assembly, 2009, p. 1)
They go on to mention several possible impacts of the current financial crisis on developing nations. A few of the highlights of these potentially negative impacts are: negative effects on trade balances, dwindling levels of foreign direct investment, “large and volatile movements in exchange rates,” contraction of world trade, and declining remittances to developing nations. Once again, there is a call to assuage these impacts through globally coordinated effort. In the words of the report, “An equitable global recovery requires the full participation of all countries in shaping appropriate responses to the crisis” (United Nations General Assembly, 2009, p.2). This call for global equity seems to hinge upon the question, “what can compel developed nations to forgo national well-being in favor of an altruistic economic approach which also benefits the global South? One potential answer to this question is found in a 2009 IMF report by Terrones et al. They state, “In many of the recoveries following financial crises …an important condition was robust world growth. This raises the question of what happens when world growth is weak or nonexistent” (Terrones et al., 2009 a, p.117).
If recovery from these types of recessions hinges upon worldwide economic health, it might behoove a developed nation to take an interest in the welfare of the rest of the world since failure to do so might result in negative consequences for every country (including the wealthier nations themselves).
Stiglitz (2010) proffered another reason to motivate wealthier nations to help. His ideas represent a sort of world-centric Pareto Optimal in maintaining that some policies are made to maximize outcomes of the country making the policy, but could be further maximized when considered from a global vantage point. He uses the example of stimulus infusions which are often used to assuage the effects of recession. He points out that developed countries can direct more money toward stimulus spending in a way that developing nations cannot. He also argues that stimulus levels are chosen in such a way as to maximize the outcome for the nation, rather than for the world. Stiglitz also explains that seeking to maximize the world outcome (rather than just the national outcome) will benefit everyone. Conversely, failure to do so will be to everyone’s detriment (Stiglitz & United Nations, 2010, p.9).
As Terrones and colleagues reported, certain types of crises appear to be diminished by world growth. Such a concept could help to promote the global coordination Stiglitz and the UN seek. While wealthier nations may be naturally reticent to give, perhaps perceiving that nothing will be received in return, Stiglitz seems to be making the point that everyone may at some time be helped (hurt) by the decision (failure) to cooperate globally.
Who has the current financial crisis hurt?
With such a pointed call for global cooperative action on the part of the UN, perhaps the nature of the current recession merits examination of the ways in which developing nations have been impacted by the recession. Some economic factors appear to be more robust than others. For example, figure 1 shows how FDI inflows decreased slightly for one year between 2008 and 2009, and subsequently turned sharply upward again in 2010 (World Bank Data). A chart of FDI inflows for high income OECD countries is provided for comparison (World Bank Data).
Figure 1 about here
GDP for the LDCs also stalled only briefly before turning upward again as illustrated in figure 2. This is in contrast to the situation for OECDs who, as a group, still have not returned to pre-crisis levels.
Figure 2 about here
Additionally, remittances and aid have proven rather robust to the effects of the recession as seen in figure 3.
Figure 3 about here
Such observations are not novel. Papademetriou et al. have noted as recently as last year that although the financial crisis spread quickly from the US and other centers, “its impact in some emerging economies proved to be much less virulent and lasting” (Papademetriou, 2010, p.4). As recently as 2009, many of these economic factors appeared to be in distress. However, as noted by Papademetriou, signs of resilience are beginning to emerge.
The fact that GDP, FDI and remittances appear to be recovering more rapidly than is the case for the high income OECDs does not mean, however, that they were not impacted by the crisis caused by the US and other OECDs. They may not have been hurt as badly as the OECDs themselves, but they still saw an unnecessary downturn as a function of the recession they did not cause.
It also does not mean they will not be impacted in the long term. The exact nature of the impact on developing countries is still ambiguous, and there are negative indicators that might impact them in unknown ways going forward. For example, net migration is lower for the LDCs than it has been in 20 years. Even though net migration had been decreasing, it has worsened during the time period encompassing the recession. Exports have also downturned and still not recovered to pre-recession levels.
Figure 4 about here
Additionally, while useful on some level, even country-level data analysis does not reveal the full impact of the recession unless it is disaggregated in some way. This is because the recession is sometimes affects certain groups within a country differently than the others. A notable example is the impact the recession has had on Hispanic immigrants in the United States when compared to the native-born population. Manuel Orozco notes that “Hispanic immigrants have been doubly affected by the crisis in the U.S. housing market in terms of employment and also with respect to their housing situations” (2009, p.7). He further notes that “public policies will likely not lessen the negative effects of the crisis for immigrants” (Orozco, 2009, p.8). This is not exclusive to the United States. In fact, in terms of employment rates, immigrants have been hurt more than the native-born in most of the European countries analyzed by Papademetriou et al. (Papademetriou et al., 2010, p. 1).
Mullan and Doña-Reveco have observed a similar situation with regards to remittances. They observe that: “At the micro level remittances can produce marked inequalities between those households that receive them and those who do not” (Mullan & Doña-Reveco, forthcoming).
While the long term impact of the recession on these countries is still unclear, it seems logical to assume that such downturns in important economic factors like migration and exports will be inevitably felt at some point. Furthermore, broad trends do not do justice to specific situations. Upon deeper examination of these factors, Papademetriou et al. have noted that what appear to be robust remittance numbers are actually being carried by very large remittance flows from South Asia (primarily India), giving a false appearance of hardiness to the other countries in the group. He further points out that “small economies which are highly dependent on remittances… were hit hard” (2010, p.2). This example with remittances seems to promote the idea that the impact on these countries cannot be done justice by broad, sweeping analysis only. Deeper analysis may reveal other such alarming trends, and proffer guidance on how to best assist specific countries.
One possible impediment to fully understanding what is happening in developing nations is the lack of information for the majority of less developed nations. Many of the countries do not make their data readily accessible, making quantitative or remote analysis extremely difficult. History was made, however, within the last six months of writing this paper: Kenya and Moldova became the first two developing nations to create open data websites (World Bank, 2011b). Of this phenomenon, the World Bank commented, “In a world where many wealthier countries still don’t make government data easily accessible and usable by the public, Kenya and Moldova are on the cutting edge” (World Bank, 2011b). If other less developed nations follow this trend, perhaps it will better enable researchers to understand what is happening at the micro- and macro-levels in terms of the impact of the recession on these countries. It seems imperative to dredge out the specifics of how developing nations are being impacted in order to best enact policy aimed at assuaging (or preventing) any negative effects stemming from the crisis they did not create.
Global cooperation and global competition
As mentioned above, it has been proposed that nations engage in globally coordinated and socially responsible action in an unprecedented way to help dampen (or prevent) the negative impacts of the recession. Logic would argue, then, that understanding this process per se would facilitate such action. In engaging in content analysis to understand the most recent position of different countries vis-à-vis such proposals for coordinated action, I saw two recurring stances. One stance is global competitiveness. A second stance is global cooperation. These are not meant to be all inclusive or mutually exclusive. However, they seem to provide utility in understanding the way countries may receive the call to globally coordinated action. It is also useful in trying to understand how taken one or the other of these stances might impact a country in terms of the recession. For example: Does the recession impact globally competitive countries differently than those that are less globally competitive?
Globally competitive stance
The following quote from Stiglitz shows an example of how global competition can relate to the call for global cooperation:
The idea that the world community as a whole should become engaged in sorting through the causes and necessary remedies for the world economic crisis has appeared strange to some nations—mostly those few, unsurprisingly, who occupy the most privileged positions in the current institutional arrangement—and deeply necessary to nearly everyone else. (Stiglitz & United Nations, 2010, p. xxvii)
Nations that are advantaged by some position of power may be less willing to participate in global cooperation. They may also be more likely to take a globally competitive stance.
US President Barack Obama gave a speech in El Paso, Texas on May 10, 2011, which paints a picture of a nation with globally competitive sentiment. He said:
Reform will also help to make America more competitive in the global economy. Today, we provide students from around the world with visas to get engineering and computer science degrees at our top universities. But then our laws discourage them from using those skills to start a business or a new industry here in the United States. Instead of training entrepreneurs to stay here, we train them to create jobs for our competition. That makes no sense. In a global marketplace, we need all the talent we can attract, all the talent we can get to stay here to start businesses — not just to benefit those individuals, but because their contribution will benefit all Americans. (White House, 2011)
A selection from the year 2000 budget speech from the Singaporean government expresses the idea as well.
Although the Asian economic crisis was brief, it has left a trail of destruction in its wake, and brought great hardship to many regional economies…In contrast, Singapore has weathered the regional crisis well and emerged largely unscathed…Our strong recovery has enabled us to start the new millennium on a firm footing… However, this does not mean we can afford to slacken…Competitiveness will remain the prime economic challenge for Singapore in the new millennium. In fact, competition will become increasingly intense as more countries join in the economic race. (Budget Speech, 2000).
It seems that the strength with which Singapore emerged from the Asian economic crisis
possibly enabled a globally competitive stance for them. This appears to be true for China as well. Ming Wan made observations about the way China reacted as a country to the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s as well as the current recession. Wan notes that the Asian financial crisis and the current financial crisis each impacted China’s rising global presence. Specifically, Wan avers that “A stronger China emerging from the crisis is playing both regional and global games with a stronger hand,” and that “China is a rising power, with an increasing global presence and a greater role in global governance” (Wan, 2010, p.520-521).
While Wan acknowledges that in some ways China remains cautious about globalism, and still pursues Asian regionalism in many senses. However, the global crisis has given China increased power which it is using to “advance its agenda on all fronts, bilateral, regional, and global” (Wan, 2010, p.538). It seems that this increased power is part of what has been encouraging them to enter the global picture in an increasing way.
Furthermore, many countries seem to be exhibiting this competitive stance defensively as well. International migration seems to be one of the major areas where this appears to be occurring. Fix et al. conducted research to understand how the recession is affecting different countries in different ways. They state: “Confronted with the most severe economic crisis in decades and rising unemployment, governments in locations across the globe embraced a range of policies to suppress the inflow of migrants, encourage their departure, and protect labor markets for native-born workers” (Fix et al., 2009, p.5).
Such countries may be those which are less likely to participate in globally coordinated efforts to aid less developed countries (sometime resulting in less-than-optimal outcomes for the more developed country). For example, the G20 came together with representatives from throughout the world at the beginning of the crisis and resolved not to “engage in (economically) protectionist measures. However, by March 2009 “nearly all had broken that pledge” (Stiglitz, 2010, p.9). In other words, more privileged countries agreed not to engage in such policies restricting international trade, but soon abandoned that resolve, perhaps when it would have proven detrimental within their own borders.
Globally cooperative stance
Other countries are evidencing what looks to be a globally cooperative stance. Presumably, some forms of global cooperation are motivated by a sense of social justice. However, it is important to note that some forms of global cooperation can benefit all involved. In turn, this may result in a country participating in global cooperation for self-interested reasons. For example, Papademetriou et al. note that while some countries in their study engaged in increasingly restrictive immigration policies, most policymakers have understood that engaging in beggar-thy-neighbor policies will reduce their attractiveness to potentially desirable immigrants, in turn reducing their competitiveness. They further note that “protectionism has not dominated immigration policies” in Europe (Papademetriou et al., 2010, p.3). At least in Europe, it seems that, in international migration, matters all are benefitted by not adopting protectionist immigration policies.
France was one of the foremost global cooperators in my content analysis of United Nations Development Programme data.[1] Leaders of India and Bangladesh have also called for the support of developing countries in areas like investment, technology, health and education (UN News Centre, 2011). It is interesting that these three countries come from three different levels of human development. France is classified by the UN as “Very high human developed.” India is classified as “Medium human development,” and Bagladesh as “Low human development.”
Additionally, France has experienced negative GDP growth since the start of the recession (-7.32% from 2008-09, and -2.46% from 2009-10) [2]. India and Bangladesh have each experienced positive GDP growth since the recession (India: 13.75% from 2008-09, and 25.23% from 2009-10; Bangladesh: 12.33% from 2008-09, and 11.99% from 2009-10). In light of the differences in human development and GDP output in this group, it would be an interesting area of future research to explore if certain types of countries are more prone to adopting a globally cooperative stance than others.
Not mutually exclusive
It appears that these two stances (globally competitive and globally cooperative) are not mutually exclusive. A good example of this is the European Union. In a 2006 communication on migration policy in the EU, it says, “the EU will need migrants to ensure the sustainability of its labour markets given its demographic developments. The EU needs to compete with other world regions and it needs migrants with the appropriate skills to accomplish that” (European Parliament, 2006, p.2). In the same document they talk about “Strengthening dialogue and cooperation with African countries of origin and transit” (European Parliament, 2006, p. 4). This represents the way that a country or entity may embody both a stance of global competitiveness and global cooperation. They express a stance of global competition, and in the same document, discuss how to reach out to less developed countries (Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana and Nigeria) in an equitable way (European Parliament, 2006).
The implications of this are not as straightforward as they may seem. For example, is the EU able to take such a stance because they do not view the African countries in question as legitimate competitors? Do they see a way in which helping neighboring countries also benefits them in the long run (perhaps in the way mentioned by Papademetriou et al.)? There could be many different explanations of this phenomenon, and understanding this dynamic could prove useful in efforts toward inclusive global cooperation.
Furthermore nations that sometimes come under criticism for failing to cooperate in a globally inclusive manner often defy that trend. For example, according to the World Bank, the formation of the Global Remittances Working Group (GRWG) was formed at the request of the world’s wealthiest nations who have at times been criticized for failing to act in a way that will benefit less developed nations. The goal of the GRWG is to help other countries by reducing the cost of international remittances (World Bank News, 2011).
Quantifying the relationship between GDP and human development (HDI)
The relationship between Human Development (e.g., LDCs compared to Highly Develped Countries) and the impact of the recession appears to be complex. In my observations, it seems that LDCs may be more resilient to the negative impacts on recession in several areas such as GDP. However, it seems that there are many other possible factors influencing the extent of the impact on a given country. These factors may include: level of global competitiveness, interconnectivity with other nations, and level of global cooperation.
Two issues balance an attempt at quantitative analysis involving global interconnectedness. The first is the fact that “In general, statistical measuring (of phenomena involving globalization) is a complex process subject to a variety of issues ranging from theoretical conceptualization to the selection of appropriate data” (Euro Indicators, 2007). In other words, due to the complex nature of globalization, it can be hard to find a way to measure it statistically. On the other hand is the idea that, should inferential utility be found to exist within a statistical model, it may concurrently help explain what is going on as well as justify its own validity. In other words, in spite of the cautions which have been issued regarding indices which have been created to approximate complex processes, their use might be justified if they produce some nature of utility in explaining what is occurring.
In order to try to understand the complex relationship between recession and things like human development, global cooperation, and global competitiveness, I used data from four different sources. I took GDP data from the World Bank Data site, and calculated GDP output for the period 2008-10. The values for this variable are the percent increase (decrease) in a given country’s GDP from 2008 to 2010.
For a measure of human development, I used the HDI index produced by the UN Development Programme. [3] For a measure of globalization, I used the KOF index, [4] and I used the WCI index to approximate global competitiveness. [5] The means and standard deviations for each variable are listed in Table 1.
In order to address the question: Do countries with lower HDI have higher GDP output through the period of the recession? I conducted multivariate regression analysis with HDI, KOF and WCI as independent variables and GDP output as the dependent variable. I set up the hypothesis test as follows:
Ha: There is an association between HDI and GDP output for the 2008-2010 period; and
H0: There is no association between HDI and GDP output for the 2008-2010 period.
The coefficients are all significant at p<0.01. The slope is significant at p<0.001. The R2 of 0.6246 indicates that the model explains 62.46% of the variation in GDP output. The p-values call for a rejection of the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative: There is an association between HDI and GDP output.
Table 1 about here
From the model, I predict GDP output to decrease by 18.4% with each increase of 1 standard deviation in the HDI (0.2) when holding KOF (globalization) and WCI (global competitiveness) constant. It is notable as well that WCI is positively associated with GDP output when the other variables are equal to zero; and KOF is negatively associated with GDP when all other variables are equal to zero.
More specifically, with each increase of 1 standard deviation (14.7) in WCI, the model predicts an increase of 7.8% in GDP output when all other variables are equal to zero. With each increase of 1 standard deviation (16.7) in KOF, the model predicts a decrease of 11.5% in GDP output when all other variables are equal to zero.
In this model, WCI is positively associated with GDP output, indicating that nations that are measured as more globally competitive by the index are more likely to have positive GDP output through the period of the recession (in this case 2008-10) when holding the other variables constant.
In the model, KOF and HDI are negatively associated. The less developed a country is, as measured by HDI, the higher the predicted GDP output for 2008-2010 when holding the other variables constant. KOF is also negatively associated. When countries are less globalized as defined by the KOF index, GDP output is predicted to be higher when holding the other variables constant.
This provides interesting insight into what the relationship might be between these factors. Do countries that are more globally competitive fare better during global recession ceteris paribus? Do countries that are less globalized fare better through recessions like the current crisis ceteris paribus due to the fact that they are not as connected to the countries from where the recession originated? Is this also true for less developed countries? This provides interesting preliminary insight into possible relationships between these different factors. It also provides interesting preliminary insight into understanding how different countries may fare in terms of GDP change through a highly internationally connected recession.
Conclusion
Global crises are not new, nor are global crises of this magnitude. The face of recession appears to be changing, with economic recession occurring less frequently. However, when they occur, the recessions appear to be more severe and longer in duration (due in part to their tie with financial crises). Joseph Stiglitz avers that economic crises have historically impacted the world’s poor disproportionately, and they are the ones least able to bear it (2010, p.1).The call for socially responsible global cooperation appears to be new, at least in magnitude. [6] With such a call for globally inclusive social responsibility, it seems important to more fully understand the specific impact of the recession on developing nations.
Many aver that the current crisis has hurt developing nations who had no part in creating the crisis. Preliminary data appear to point to the idea that, while they have been hurt by the crisis, many of these countries (especially LDCs) appear to be bouncing back more quickly than high income OECD nations. However, in certain areas (such as migration and exports), least developed nations have taken a big hit and have still not returned to pre-recession levels. Also, the specific impacts within a country (micro-level impacts) are still largely ambiguous, although there is strong indication that many countries are experiencing growing disparity between different groups within their own borders.
While the G20 and others have put “the soundness, stability, transparency of financial systems” (Moshirian, 2011) on their agendas in light of the global recession, many prestigious, advantaged nations will doubtless be slow to fully adopt a policy of maximizing global outcomes at the expense of an optimized national outcome. No country appears to be exclusively globally competitive or globally cooperative. In fact, the EU (among others e.g., G8, G20) as a group exemplify how these traits may be concurrently present even within the same policy.
Furthermore, preliminary data analysis suggests that there may be an interesting and potentially useful relationship between such factors as human development, global competitiveness, level of globalization and impact on post-recession GDP.
Perhaps a deeper understanding of these issues will facilitate international coordination in a way that is systematic and more beneficial to all involved.
Tables and Figures
References
Budget Speech. (2000). Singapore Government. Retrieved from http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2000/competing.html (accessed 12/11/11 5:22 PM).
Dreher, A. (2006). Does Globalization Affect Growth? Evidence from a new Index of Globalization, Applied Economics 38(10) 1091-1110.
Euro Indicators. (2007). Focus on: Measuring globalization. Eurostat. European Union Publication.
European Parliament and the Commission to the Council. (2006). The global approach to migration one year on: Towards a comprehensive European migration policy. Commission of the European Communities. European Union.
Fix, M., Papademetriou, D.G., Batalova, J., Terrazas, A., Lin, S.Y., & Mittelstadt, M. (2009). Migration and the global recession: A report commissioned by the BBC World Service. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.
Martell, L. (2010). The Sociology of globalization. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Moshiran, F. (2011). Global financial stability, Journal of Banking and Finance. Elsevier B.V. Retrieved from http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/S04.cws_home/global_financial_stability_ed (accessed 11/23/11 7:39 AM).
Mullan, B., & Doña-Reveco, C. (forthcoming). Emigration and the sending state. forthcoming publication in The Handbook of International Migration. Routledge.
Oladi, R. (2004). Strategic quotas on foreign investment and migration. Economic Theory, 24(2), 289-306.
Orozco, M. (2009). Migration and remittances in times of recession: Effects on Latin American economies. Inter-American Dialogue. OECD publication.
Papademetriou, D.G., Sumption, M., & Terrazas, A., with Burkert, C., Loyal, S., Ferrero-Turrión, R. (2010). Migration and immigrants two years after the financial collapse: Where do we stand? Washington , DC: Migration Policy Institute.
Poot, J., Cochrane, B. (2004). Measuring the economic impact of immigration: a scoping paper. Population Sutdies Centre. Retrieved from http://www.immigration.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/CC67A9CF-CDF5-4F87-9790-C6F61EBEEB18/0/ScopingpaperontheEconomicImpactsofImmigration.pdf (accessed 11/11/11 12:56 PM).
Slack, A., Wu, J. and Nana, G. (2007). Fiscal impacts of immigration 2005/06. Department of Labor. Retrieved from http://www.immigration.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/88358E39-2AF0-4A19-B391-E2541EAC22D7/0/DOL107051FiscalImpactsofImmigration200506.pdf (accessed 11/11/11 1:09 PM).
Stiglitz, J. E., & United Nations. (2010). The Stiglitz report: Reforming the international monetary and financial systems in the wake of the global crisis. New York, N.Y: The New Press.
Stillman, S., and Maré, D.C. (2009). The labor market adjustment of immigrants in New Zealand Report. Economic Impacts of Immigration Working Paper Series. Retrieved from http://www.dol.govt.nz/publications/research/lmainz/lmainz-03.asp (accessed 11/11/11 1:14 PM).
Terrones, M.E., Scott, A., & Kannan, P. (2009a). From recession to recovery: How soon and How strong? World Economic Outlook (WEO):Crisis and Recovery: International Monetary Fund. Retrieved from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2009/01/ (accessed 12/1/11 1:10 PM).
Terrones, M.E., Scott, A., & Kannan, P. (2009b). Global recession to be long, deep with slow recovery. IMF Survey Magazine: IMF Research. Retrieved from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2009/res041609b.htm (accessed 12/1/11 1:38 PM).
Transcript of a Press Briefing with Christine Lagarde, Tokyo Japan, November 12, 2011. International Monetary Fund. Retrieved from http://www.imf.org/external/np/tr/2011/tr111211.htm (accessed 12/8/11 1:00 PM).
UNDP Publication. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/International_Cooperation_eng.pdf (accessed 11/11/11 3:20 PM).
United Nations General Assembly, 63rd Session. (2009). A/RES/63/303, Agenda Item 48. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/documents/index.shtml (accessed 11/16/11 11:14 AM).
UN News Centre. (2011). At UN, India calls for global cooperation to overcome economic woes. UNNC Publication.
Wan, M. (2010). The Great Recession and China’s policy toward Asian regionalism. Asian Survey, 50(5) 520-538.
White House Press Release. (2011). Remarks by the President on comprehensive immigration reform in El Paso, TX. Office of the Press Secretary.
World Bank. (2011a). Migration and Remittances. Retrieved from http://go.worldbank.org/RR8SDPEHO0 (accessed 12/8/11 6:37 PM).
World Bank. (2011b). Open data: Kenya, Moldova yield lessons for developing countries. World Bank Publication. Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/news/kenya-moldova-lessons-for-dvlpng-countries (accessed 11/23/11 7:20 AM).
World Bank Data. (2011). Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org (accessed 12/11/11 1:28 AM).
World Bank News. (2011). Migration and remittances. World Bank News and Broadcasts. Permanent URL: http://go.worldbank.org/RR8SDPEHO0 (accessed 11/23/11 10:50 AM).
[1] “UNDP implemented a similar project with France’s support in the Comoros, where joint Efforts… In Burkina Faso, for example, the joint activities of France and UNDP form part of the National Programme to Combat HIV/AIDS, particularly… France, among other European countries, has made a financial contribution to the Emergency Economic Management Fund… France has combined forces with UNDP for “humanitarian landmine clearance” projects, including in Cambodia… in Mozambique, France contributed 1 170 000 euros to speeding up the clearance of landmines…” (UNDP Publication).
[2] Data computed from World Bank Data Indicators http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD (accessed 12/11/11).
[3] hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/
[4] Dreher, Axel (2006): Does Globalization Affect Growth? Evidence from a new Index of Globalization, Applied Economics 38, 10: 1091-1110.
[5] http://www.imd.org/research/publications/wcy/index.cfm
[6] In Stiglitz’s words “The international community has responded to the crisis in an unprecedented way” (Stiglitz, 2010, p. 193).
Jeffrey R. Oliver 