Localist Movements in a Global Economy: Sustainability, Justice and Urban Development in the United States by David J. Hess

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-103
Author(s):  
Faidra Papavasiliou
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Urban Development ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States

Ocena antykryzysowej polityki gospodarczej Stanów Zjednoczonych i wybranych państw członkowskich Unii Europejskiej w latach 2005–2014

2016 ◽  
pp. 26-46
Author(s):  
Marcin Jan Flotyński
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Financial Markets ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
High Volatility ◽  
The Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Domestic Products

The global financial crisis in 2007–2009 began a period of high volatility on the financial markets. Specifically, it caused an increased amplitude of fluctuations of the level of gross domestic products, the level of investment and consumption and exchange rates in particular countries. To address the adverse market circumstances, governments and central banks took actions in order to bolster the weakening global economy. The aim of this article is to present the anti-crisis actions in the United States and selected member states of the European Union, including Poland, and an assessment of their efficiency. The analysis conducted indicates that generally the actions taken in the United States in response to the crisis were faster and more adequate to the existing circumstances than in the European Union.

United States and Its Challenge to Multilateralism in the Global Economy

2018 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 402-419
Author(s):  
Krishnakumar S.
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
World Economy ◽  
Foreign Exchange Market ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
Merchandise Trade

With Donald Trump as President of United States, multilateralism in the world economy is facing an unprecedented challenge. The international economic institutions that have evolved since the fifties are increasingly under the risk of being undermined. With the growing assertion of the emerging and developing economies in the international fora, United States is increasingly sceptical of its ability to maneuvre such institutions to suit its own purpose. This is particularly true with respect to WTO, based on “one country one vote” system. The tariff rate hikes initiated by the leader country in the recent past pose a serious challenge to the multilateral trading system. The paper tries to undertake a critical overview of the US pre-occupation of targeting economies on the basis of the bilateral merchandise trade surpluses of countries, through the trade legislations like Omnibus Act and Trade Facilitation Act. These legislations not only ignore the growing share of the United States in the growing invisibles trade in the world economy, but also read too much into the bilateral trade surpluses of economies with United States and the intervention done by them in the foreign exchange market.

scholarly journals China’s AI experience: industrial digitalization

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 536-546
Author(s):  
Marina S. Reshetnikova
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Global Innovation ◽  
Innovative Products ◽  
Fundamental Research ◽  
The Moment

The rapid acceleration of scientific and technological progress, which started at the beginning of the 21st century, has become a decisive factor in influencing the global economy. Who will lead the global innovation race? This problem is especially relevant in the field of artificial intelligence (AI). At the moment, the United States and China are the main participants in the battle for dominance in this area. The author assesses Chinas innovative potential in the field of AI and identifies its achievements in this area. Based on the statistics provided, Chinas AI leadership has reached a critical point. China is confidently leading the new fundamental research of artificial intelligence, forming its theoretical base and applied research and development, which will contribute to the creation of new high-tech innovative products and services. However, in terms of the number and quality of AI specialists (AI Talents) and the number of companies engaged in AI, China is still lagging behind its main rival, namely the United States. The author proved that, despite the obvious successes of China, the United States still has an equal lead in the global innovation race.

scholarly journals Prediction and comparison of the impact of COVID-19 epidemic on the financial industry of major countries based on neural intelligent algorithm

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 8831-8838
Author(s):  
Bin Wang ◽  
Qingyuan Zhou
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Mutual Influence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Household Consumption ◽  
Intermediate Input ◽  
Financial Industry ◽  
Government Consumption ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

The global economy appears the trend of anti-globalization under the influence of COVID-19. Based on the input-output table of lead database from 2006 to 2020, this paper divides the factors that affect the development of financial industry in China, the United States and Russia into six aspects: price, intermediate input, household consumption, government consumption, export and import. ADGA-BP neural network model is proposed in this paper, which is based on six aspects of price, intermediate input, consumer, government consumption, export and import. The intermediate input is decomposed from the perspective of industrial structure to study the interrelationship between financial industry and other industries in the three countries. The results show that the intermediate input is the main factor in the development of financial industry in the three countries, but the source industries of the intermediate input are not the same; the two factors of household consumption and price are closely related to the development of financial industry in the three countries, and they all play a role in promoting China, while the relationship between household consumption and the United States and between price and Russia is reverse; Government consumption only has a significant impact on Russia; from the perspective of mutual influence, the mutual investment between the financial industry of China and the United States is relatively large, while the relationship between the Russian financial industry and the two countries is relatively weak. It shows that under the background of covid-19, the development of financial industry is affected.

scholarly journals The U.S.-China technological war through the prism of techno-nationalism

2021 ◽  
pp. 29-43
Author(s):  
I. Danilin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
The United States ◽  
Market Situation ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China ◽  
The U.S

The “technological war” between the United States and China that started in 2017–2018 raises a number of questions about the future role of technological development as a factor in relations between superpowers. Analysis shows that for the United States this conflict is caused by changing balance of risks and benefits of the liberal model of globalization due to the rise of China`s power and growing geopolitical tensions between the two nations. In this context, emerging, especially digital, technologies appear to be a new battlefield between superpowers. Within the realist framework, actors consider emerging technologies as a key factor for strengthening their global postures. This, among other things, contributes to securitized technological agenda and strengthens its geopolitical dimension. Neo-technonationalism has become the platform that integrates different processes and goals into new U.S. policy. Although historically neo-technonationalism took its roots in Asia, the evolving market situation prompted the United States to rethink existing approaches and to upgrade the techno-nationalist dimension of its policy. Considering similar policies of China and the EU (i. e. the European digital sovereignty policy), this trend shapes new realities of technological “blocs”, the struggle for expansion of technological platforms, and technological conflicts. Taking into account prospective development needs of the global economy and future specification of mutual interest areas, as new digital technologies mature, the ground for normalizing the dialogue between the superpowers will emerge. However, at least in the U.S.–China case, this issue will be complicated by geopolitical contradictions that leave little room for any serious compromise.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document