Globalisation is a word we hear a lot of. The world economy is constantly changing and the financial crisis, from which the world is still recovering, is a prime example of just how interdependent nations are. Tony Blair has extended this idea of interdependence in the context of universities and the so-called knowledge economy. As technology advances and economies become more interdependent, international competitiveness is becoming increasingly important and this is one area where universities are vital.
“If you look at the world’s current and emerging superpowers, nearly all have either well-established or are currently establishing university systems that will help them compete in the global economy.”
Just how important is a country’s higher education system and what has been the impact of globalisation on them?
Tony Blair’s global ‘battle of ideas’ BBC News, Sean Coughlan (7/3/11)
Top schools face globalisation challenge Financial Times, Jonathan Doh and Guy Pfefferman (6/3/11)
Questions
- What do we mean by a ‘knowledge economy?
- What is globalisation and how is the interdependence of nations relevant to this concept?
- Tony Blair says that the world’s superpowers all have well-established or are currently establishing university systems. Why is it this helps them to compete globally?
- What are the benefits of higher education? Do they accrue mainly to the individual receiving the education or to society? On which factors does your answer depend?
- What role does information play in making the global education environment more competitive?
Growth in the UK for the final quarter of 2010 was originally at -0.5%. However, the latest data has revised that figure to -0.6% and not all of this was down to the snow. Analysts say that the snow effect is still believed to explain the 0.5% contraction, but the economy therefore declined by 0.1% because of other reasons and retailers have seen the effects. Primark has reported a ‘noticeable’ slowdown in demand since the beginning of 2011. With increasing VAT and rising cotton prices, clothing retailers are feeling the squeeze. The same is true of UK consumers. With an increase in VAT and high inflation, consumers’ purchasing power has simply fallen and so they are spending less. Despite this slowdown, Primark’s revenues are still significantly ahead of the same time last year.
The parent company, Associated British Foods (ABF) commented on the disappointing trading of 2011 so far, saying:
“Since the New Year, the performance in all our operations in Continental Europe has been very encouraging but there has been a noticeable slowing down of UK consumer demand.”
However, despite disappointing figures for Primark, UK retail sales did pick up in January, although analysts are warning against taking this information as a sign of recovery. As Hetal Mehta from Daiwa said:
“While we expected there to be some clawback from December’s dismal, snow-hit retail sales, today’s jump is a welcome surprise. But is still far too early to conclude that consumers are weathering the storm … and with the past week’s unemployment figures highlighting the fragility of the labour market, the housing market continuing to weaken and real earnings being hit hard by high inflation, it seems inconceivable that consumer spending will act as the driving force of the economy over the near term.”
There are many opinions about what to expect from the economy in 2011, but for any concrete information, we really have to wait for at least another month. Perhaps by Easter, we’ll have a better idea about the state of the UK. For now, there are a few articles considering the retail sector.
Primark owner warns of slowing sales in UK Guardian, Graeme Wearden (28/2/11)
Primark warns of ‘noticeable’ slowdown in UK demand BBC News (28/2/11)
Growth in UK retail sales slows sharply Wall Street Journal, Alex Brittain and Art Patnaude (24/2/11)
UK retail sales rebound: reaction Telegraph (28/2/11)
UK GDP figure revised down further BBC News (25/2/11)
Questions
- Why has higher VAT and cotton prices impacted retailers such as Primark?
- Why was Primark less affected by declining sales in the run up to Christmas?
- What do we mean by purchasing power?
- Why is it hard to draw any conclusions about the performance of the UK at the moment?
- What does a slowing down of retail sales mean for the UK’s recovery? Will it influence the Chancellor’s Budget?
Oil is a commodity like any other – its price is affected by demand and supply. Back in 2003, with the impending war in Ira and strikes in Venezuela, oil prices increased and continued to do so as further supply concerns developed in Saudi Arabia, Russia and Nigeria. This upward trend continued until 2008, when with the growing banking turmoil and demand for oil falling, the price began to decline. However, the crisis in Libya is only making matters worse. Its credit-rating has been downgraded with the potential for it to be lowered further and concerns are deepening about the country’s crude exports. As Libya is the world’s 12th largest exporter of oil, these supply concerns have started to push up oil prices once more.
With inflation rates already high and political turmoil pushing oil prices up further, consumers and firms are feeling the squeeze. These changes have also been reflected on stock markets across the world. Analyst, Michael Hewson at CMC Markets said:
‘Given the fact that we have seen massive gains in stock markets over the last few months, investors have been nervous about a possible correction for some time… The tensions in the Middle East with Libya imploding and concerns that the unrest could spread to Saudi Arabia could provide a catalyst for (this) correction.’
The disruption in the Middle East has caused companies such as Eni of Italy and Repsol YPF of Spain to shut down production, leading to output losses of some 22% of Libya’s production. As supply contracts from this region, prices will inevitably rise. However, the Saudi oil Minister has said that he is ready to boost production to offset any decline, but that at present there is no oil crisis. So, what can we expect to happen to oil prices in the coming months? It will all depend on changes in demand and supply.
Articles
Libyan crisis threatens to spark oil crisis Financial Times, Javier Blas and David Blair (22/2/11)
Libya protests: oil prices rise as unrest continues BBC News (22/2/11)
Oil producers, users sign charter as prices spike Associated Press (21/2/11)
Oil shock fears as Libya erupts Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (22/2/11)
Arab protests pose energy threat BBC News, Damian Kahya (22/2/11)
All eyes on Bahrain as Gulf tremors frighten oil markets Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (22/2/11)
Saudi Arabia seeks to calm market with words not oil Reuters (22/2/11)
Saudi Arabia says oil market needs no intervention Associated Press (21/2/11)
Peace in Bahrain is key to stopping oil prices from surging Live Oil Prices (22/2/11)
Data
Commodity Prices Index Mundi
Crude Oil Price Chart WTI
Questions
- What are the key factors that influence the supply of oil? How will each factor affect the supply curve?
- What are the key factors that influence the demand for oil? How will each factor affect the demand curve?
- Putting your answers to questions 1 and 2 together and using your knowledge of recent events in the oil market, explain the changes in oil prices.
- How are oil prices affected by OPEC?
- How have rising oil prices affected the stock market? What’s the explanation for this relationship?
- How might higher prices affect the economic recovery? Think about the impact on consumers and firms.
Ahead of Lord Davies’s report on Boardroom equality, he will be somewhat alarmed by the survey results carried out by the Institute of Leadership and Management, which found that 73% of women felt that they still face barriers to top-level promotion. Quotas are a suggestion to break down this barrier. As Sheelagh Whittaker, a non-executive directive of Standard Life said:
‘I am a big supporter of quotas. I believe that we will only have true equality when we have as many incompetent women in positions of power as incompetent men.’
However, others say that quotas are not the answer, as they don’t actually change the fundamentals. Forcing compliance for equality in the workplace is not the same as equality in the workplace. There are a number of other reasons behind fewer women in top level positions, including less confidence and ambition, a more risk-averse attitude to promotion, as well as more women than men aspiring to run their own company, rather than seek promotion within a firm. So does discrimination still remain in the workplace or are there other explanations for the fact that only 12% of FTSE 100 directors are women?
Women still face a glass ceiling Guardian, Graham Dnowdwon (21/2/11)
Female managers say classing ceiling intact – survey BBC News (21/2/11)
The ‘glass ceiling’ is all in the mind: women lack confidence and ambition at work says new survey Daily Mail, Steve Doughty (21/2/11)
Women hit glass ceiling while report rejects boardroom quotas Independent, David Prosser (21/2/11)
Poll: Glass ceiling still a barrier The Press Association (21/2/11)
Men not to blame for the glass ceiling The Australian, Jack Grimston (21/2/11)
Questions
- How are equilibrium wages determined in perfect and imperfect markets?
- Is it efficient for a firm to pay men more than women or to hire/promote more men than women?
- Illustrate the concept of discrimination against women in the labour market. Think about the effect on the MRP curve and hence on equilibrium quantity and wage. How does this affect the MRP curve for men?
- What are the other causes of less women being FTSE 100 directors besides ‘the glass ceiling’?
- To what extent would a quota be effective in achieving gender equality in the workplace?
- Are there any other policies that could be used to tackle discrimination of any kind? What are the pros and cons of each?
One of the key areas discussed in the election was welfare and in particular what to do about those who remain long term dependent on welfare. How can the UK government encourage people back to work? A key issue is the poverty trap: some people are simply better off living on benefits than they are getting a job. Here, we’re talking about the marginal-tax-plus-lost-benefit rate. When you start earning, you get taxed, pay national insurance contributions and lose some of your benefits. All this leads to a situation where work doesn’t pay.
In a paper ‘Escaping the Poverty Trap’ by Lawrence Kay, he considered how much better off people are moving from different benefits into work, taking into account the high costs of actually finding a job and then starting work. He found that after 16 hours of work, someone on Job-seekers’ allowance would be £15.07 poorer and someone on Employment and Support Allowance would be £39.35 worse off. In many cases, people were facing a marginal effective tax rate in excess of 100%. Given this, it’s hardly surprising that Lawrence Kay found that ‘Long term welfare claims have been Britain’s blight for many years’.
However, the Coalition has plans to change this and make sure that those in work are paid more and are better off than those on benefits. By making working life a more attractive option, this should encourage those for whom work doesn’t pay to enter the labour force. This will obviously benefit them, increase the potential output of the economy (hence growth) and improve net taxes, as tax revenue rises and benefits expenditure falls. While this may not lead to tax cuts for those in work (as benefits spending falls), it may mean that more tax revenue is devoted to areas such as health and education or that the government can close the budget deficit.
The ‘universal credit’ aims to simplify the current system and make work pay, by re-introducing a culture of work in households. There is also a plan to place sanctions on those turning down work and place a cap on benefits to any single family. There was also be tax changes aimed at helping those moving into work keep more of their money, thereby removing, or at least reducing, the poverty trap. However, some families will lose out – as the IFS noted, any reform ‘creates winners and losers’. However, the reforms are a step in the right direction. As David Cameron said:
“I think that will, over time, solve the whole poverty trap issue that has bedeviled governments of all colours.”
The Labour party does back some of the changes, but questions whether there is enough help for people finding work. Another issue that must be considered is while it is undoubtedly a good plan to encourage more people to move into work and off benefits, which jobs will they move into? With unemployment still high, now is not exactly the best time to be looking for a job. However, whatever the state of the economy, providing incentives for people to move from benefits into work is definitely a good plan, but of course the methods used will be under constant scrutiny.
Articles
Iain Duncan Smith sets out Welfare Reform Bill plans BBC News (17/2/11)
Bill ditches housing benefit cut The Press Association (17/2/11)
Life on benefits is no longer an option Mail Online, James Chapman (17/2/11)
Universal Credit welfare switch ‘to hit 1.4m homes’ BBC News (12/1/11)
Nick Clegg blocks housing benefit cut for jobless Guardian, Patrick Wintour (17/2/11)
It’s time to end this addiction to benefits Telegraph (17/2/11)
Report
Escaping the Poverty Trap Policy Exchange, Lawrence Kay 2010
Questions
- What is the poverty trap? Which factors make it worse?
- Why does the poverty trap act as a labour supply disincentive for those on benefits?
- If taxes of those in work have to be increased, what happens to their incentive to work more hours? Think about the income and substitution effects of a real wage change.
- Why is it that working may not pay?
- How does the Universal Credit aim to alleviate the poverty trap? Who are likely to be the winners and losers from the government’s proposed welfare reforms?
- What is a marginal-tax-plus-lost-benefit rate? How do you calculate it?
- Are there any other policies that could also reduce the poverty trap? How effective are they likely to be?