Technology Transfer

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pranab Chatterjee ◽  
Heehyul Moon ◽  
Derrick Kranke
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Community Organization ◽  
The United States ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Important Idea ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Local Use ◽  
Rich Countries ◽  
Applied Knowledge

The term technology transfer was first used widely during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations when the role of the United States in relation to developing countries was being formed. At that time, it meant knowledge transfer from the rich countries to the poor countries. In social work, the idea is important in efforts of community organization, community development, and social development. It is also an important idea in direct practice. Technology in these practice settings means the application of a basic social science toward facilitating one or more given ends that benefit human beings. Technology transfer means the passing on of such applied knowledge from one discipline or specialty to another. The application of technology transfer also requires understanding of the cultural setting where it originates as well as of the setting where it is imported for local use.

The U.N. and the (Economic) Education of Henry Kissinger

Worldview ◽  
1976 ◽  
Vol 19 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 7-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Stalson
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Education ◽  
Henry Kissinger ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The World ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Rich Countries

Something remarkable and of historic importance took place in New York during the first two weeks of September, 1975. At a Special Session of the United Nations the poor countries of the world, who have 70 per cent of its people and 30 per cent of its income, demanded that the rich, countries make some major changes in the international system. And the rich countries, including the United States, responded in new ways. Most reporters failed to notice how remarkable the events were, but the evidence is there.

scholarly journals Global economy and its sustainability in the globalized world

2020 ◽  
Vol 74 ◽  
pp. 04008
Author(s):  
Jorma Jaakko Imppola
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Critical Factor ◽  
Poor People ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Global Sustainability ◽  
Distribution Of Wealth ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Rich Countries ◽  
Globalized World

Globalized economy has changed the whole world both in good and in bad. The changes in economy have significant impact on the everyday life, which affect practically everyone. Because the economy, monetary systems and financial markets form the operational platform of the globalized world, it is necessary to understand their role. As the economy is one of the three main pillars of the sustainability, it is impossible to develop the global sustainability without stabile and sustainable economy. The inequality of the distribution of wealth and prosperity is the most critical factor of economic sustainability and the ever-increasing accumulation of wealth and money is one of the most crucial factors jeopardising the global sustainability. People and nations struggling economically are usually having the biggest challenges with both social and environmental sustainability. Wealth works dually: it enables rich people and nations to increase their consumption footprint and they hinder poor people and nations to make consumer decisions and investments needed to improve sustainability. The rich countries have outsourced their unsustainable industrial activities to poor countries having undeveloped legislation and maximized their profits by utilising these socially and ecologically unsustainable labour and production practises, which most are illegal in the rich countries.

Environmental characteristics and organizational ideology: UNCTAD—the lessons of 1964

1978 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-160
Author(s):  
Javed A. Ansari
Keyword(s):  
Third World ◽  
Commodity Prices ◽  
Trade Policies ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Negotiated Settlement ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich ◽  
The Third World ◽  
Rich Countries

THE United Nations Conference on Trade and Development came nto existence in 1964. Its creation was viewed with a degree of cautious enthusiasm by the Third World and with a certain amount of apprehension by the rich countries. Its performance has dampened the enthusiasm and heightened the apprehension. Its contribution to substantive changes in trade policies has not been spectacular. Whatever improvement in commodity prices and hence in the terms of trade of the poor countries that occurred in the early 1970s was attributable to fortuitous circumstances – not to a negotiated settlement between the rich and poor countries, enabling the latter to retain a larger portion of the gains from trade. Can we3 therefore3 say that UNGTAD has been ineffective? That it has failed to perform its global task? And if so, what is the cause of this failure? Is the organizational ideology unsuitable in the sense that it is not representative of the national objectives of viable coalitions among UNGTAD constituents? Or has the leadership failed to evolve a strategy which links the pursuit of specific sub-goals to the transformation of the system in accordance with the organizational ideology? This present paper attempts to look at the first question and to venture an opinion on the effectiveness of UNGTAD in the light of these findings.

scholarly journals Testing The Convergence Hypothesis Using Time Series Techniques: The Case Of Greece 1971-1996

2011 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Asteriou ◽  
S. Karagianni ◽  
C. Siriopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Convergence Hypothesis ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Empirical Economics ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Northern Regions ◽  
Popular View ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Rich Countries ◽  
Of Greece

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-hyphenate: none;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Over the last five years, few issues have proven more controversial in empirical economics than the so-called convergence hypothesis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This paper considers the issue of convergence across Greek regions, using time series techniques.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Our empirical results support the popular view prevailing in Greece about the existence of dualism across the Southern and Northern regions of Greece.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A possible explanation for this may be the lack of experience that the poor countries (like Greece) have in comparison with the rich ones.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The rich countries have the combined ability to educate themselves as they grow rich and the endogenous ability to accumulate the knowledge upon which these efforts are made.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Also, the same argument can be used as an explanation for the regional differences -the fact that the poor regions do not have previous experience and knowledge for efficient investments.</span></span></p>

Greenhouse Development Rights: A Framework for Climate Protection That Is “More Fair” Than Equal Per Capita Emissions Rights

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Kemp-Benedict ◽  
Sivan Kartha
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
The United States ◽  
Industrialized Countries ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Right To Development ◽  
Precautionary Action ◽  
The Rich

There is a fairly broad consensus among both the philosophers who write about climate change and the majority of the climate-policy community that efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions—“mitigation” in the jargon—should not harm the ability of poor countries to grow economically and to reduce as rapidly as possible the widespread poverty their citizens suffer. Indeed, this principle of a “right to development” has been substantially embraced in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) itself. Yet as the evidence of the risks from climate change has continued to mount and calls have grown for more stringent mitigation targets, the need to give substance to this right has come into conflict with the evident unwillingness of already “developed” countries to pay the costs of adequately precautionary mitigation. The long and the short of it is that almost any reasonable ethical principles lead to the conclusion that, as Henry Shue (1999) put it straightforwardly, “the costs [of mitigation] should initially be borne by the wealthy industrialized states.” In the words of the UNFCCC, “the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof,” and this point is embodied in practical terms in the Kyoto Protocol itself, in which only the 40 developed “Annex I” countries have binding emissions limits. Yet particularly because of the rejection of Kyoto by the United States but also because of the weak efforts at mitigation that have taken place so far in Europe, Japan, and other industrialized countries, we find ourselves in a situation in which precaution requires that emissions be reduced extremely soon in poor countries, too, but the rich countries can’t yet be said to have fulfilled their obligations to “take the lead.” The delay in taking action so far, the increasing evidence of current climate-change impacts and greater risks than previously estimated, and the speed with which we must now move all imply substantially greater costs for adequately precautionary action than were previously estimated.

Conditional Convergence and the Rise of China: A Political Economy Approach to Understanding Global Power Transitions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Beckley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Power Transition ◽  
Conditional Convergence ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Global Power ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Growth Prospects ◽  
Rich Countries ◽  
The Rise Of China

Abstract Many scholars predict that China will soon challenge the United States for global primacy. This prediction is largely based on power transition theory, which assumes that rising challengers inevitably “converge” economically and militarily with reigning hegemons. Economists, however, have shown that convergence is a conditional process: sometimes poor countries grow faster than rich countries, but sometimes they fall further behind. Determining whether a US-China power transition will occur in the years ahead, therefore, requires specifying the drivers of long-term economic growth and assessing each country's growth prospects in light of these factors. This article does exactly that. Drawing on recent research in economics, I show that there are three main growth drivers—geography, institutions, and demography—and that the United States scores highly across these factors whereas China suffers from critical weaknesses. These results suggest that a US-China power transition is unlikely.

Engineering for Humanity

1982 ◽  
Vol 196 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
M W Thring
Keyword(s):  
Raw Materials ◽  
High Technology ◽  
First Century ◽  
Cumulative Effects ◽  
Considerable Reduction ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Rich Countries

When one looks at the twenty-first century it is clear that the extrapolation of high technology must lead to disaster. The factors are arms escalation, increase of the gap between rich and poor countries, growth of deserts, exhaustion of easily won raw materials, especially hydrocarbons, the cumulative effects of pollution, and increasing unemployment. Necessary steps towards a stable world are for the rich countries to accept a considerable reduction in their use of resources, to provide everyone with an interesting and well paid job and to shift a steadily increasing fraction of their engineering R & D resources from weaponry to co-operative production of equipment for the poor countries.

scholarly journals Global public good and universal health coverage: conceptual and practical concerns in the context of COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 3198
Author(s):  
Rajasekharan K. Nayar
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Universal Health Coverage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Public Good ◽  
Health Coverage ◽  
Equity Issues ◽  
Environmental Goods ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Rich Countries ◽  
Universal Health

The notion of public good has been reclaimed in recent times due to the pandemic as in many countries including the United States, the existing infrastructural, strategic and investment limitations have been realized. There is need for a debate on the notion of global public good especially with respect to health and to bring out the incommensurability of the notion. Along with these realizations and reclamations, issues related to the three A’s- accessibility, availability and affordability of health car have also been raised as a part of universal health coverage (UHC). The three A’s have become more relevant in the context of the pandemic. However, the ideological underpinnings of such conceptual reclamations and probable linkages need to be discussed. In fact, public good assumes the distribution of services equally to all members of the society which is problematic as it may not take care of equity issues in societies where some people suffer more and need special care and services. Public good is a ‘troubled’ notion which has its origin and also has been used in neo-classical and neoliberal approaches and it cannot be recommended without a proper understanding of the diverse ways in which the concept has been treated. The need for current claiming or reclaiming of such concepts started with environmental goods (although not many the so-called environmentalists realise it) to highlight destruction of global commons or resources which will result in loss of markets and therefore profits. The present reclaiming of the concept is also because of such a realisation as the pandemic has affected market interests. New approaches are evolving because of the so-called 'aid fatigue' of donors as they think that economic aids may be irrelevant at this time as the rich countries are also suffering and therefore, let them manage on their own!

The Isolated Periphery

2019 ◽  
pp. 127-168
Author(s):  
Daniel W. Bromley
Keyword(s):  
Western Europe ◽  
Meaningful Work ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Managerial Capitalism ◽  
Sectarian Conflict ◽  
The Rich ◽  
A Minor

Possessive individualism afflicts countries at the periphery of the rich metropole that are also trapped by economic isolation, dysfunctional governance, and social alienation. Households in these countries are precariously isolated relative to the political and economic power of international commerce. Managerial capitalism has rendered millions of these households as little more than residual suppliers of cheap labor. Why are these poor countries unable to offer compelling livelihoods to their citizens? Their colonial past is a part of the explanation, but contemporary capitalism continues to bear down on their economic prospects. In the absence of meaningful work, there can be no mystery why sectarian conflict emerges. And then such conflict both encourages the emergence of authoritarian leaders and reinforces it. The political climate in many countries of the isolated periphery is a minor variant of what is now occurring in parts of western Europe, Great Britain, and the United States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document