Innovation and growth: supply and demand factors in the recent US expansion

It is widely held that the social-economic context of the US,characterised by labour market flexibility and deregulationof product and capital markets, lies at the basis of the innovativecapacity displayed by the country's productive system in the1990s, thus accounting for the growth differential with Europe.Starting from a different interpretative model of innovationand growth, the paper focuses on both supply (institutionaland technological) and demand factors. It is argued that, whentheir interaction is taken into account, there is no strongevidence that more deregulated labour and product markets areamong the factors allowing for US growth. In accordance withthe view that there is no single road to innovation and growth,this leaves room for the exploration and implementation of policiesthat might reconcile innovation and growth with safeguards suchas those provided by Europe's social institutions.     

Flexibility and Growth

After two decades of theoretical discussion and application of labour policies aimed at flexibility, ever-spreading unemployment in Europe has compelled some official institutions to admit that the 'rigidity' of the labour market does not suffice to account for the different trends in employment displayed by Europe and the United States. In this paper, we focus on the role played by differentials in income growth. After briefly reviewing the explanations of European unemployment based on labour market rigidity and their respective weaknesses, we look at the relationship between growth and employment, concluding that there are grounds for maintaining that the causes of Europe's higher unemployment reside mainly in its lower rate of growth.We therefore investigate the reasons that may be responsible for a more stringent macroeconomic constraint on European growth.We conclude that if a lack of growth is at the root of European unemployment, then merely dismantling labour market institutions, and replacing them with a more flexible system of industrial relations, will not only fail to produce the expected results but may also have negative effects, in both the social and productive structure.     

Time,cash and services: Reforms for a future sustainable long-term care

The elder care sector is at the core of a radical restructuring process as all the European countries strive to cope with demographic and social change. While current and prospective rapid population ageing is expected greatly to increase the demand for elder care services, financial constraints, social change and rising female employment all act as obstacles to the provision of an adequate supply of care labour.In their search for a financially sustainable response to these challenges the EU countries have brought in various reforms designed to mobilise resources and achieve more cost-efficient results. The paper presents an analysis of the main objectives of care reforms – making care affordable, favouring the creation of a care market, and making work pay – as well as their possible trade-offs. In fact, entailing as it does a larger role for the family, greater reliance on home care may clash with the goal of a higher female activity rate; good jobs and decent working conditions in the care sector may run counter to the principle of care affordability for the greatest possible numbers, while subsidising demand may conflict with public finance sustainability. These interactions, and the interdependence between the care market and the rest of the economy, are crucial factors that will need to be considered in order to ensure consistency between goals and policies.     

The Asymmetric Impact of War: Resilience,Vulnerability and Implications for EU Policy

Intereconomics - In 2019, over 96% of EU27 oil needs, nearly 90% of natural gas and over 43% of solid fuels were met by net imports, with the largest share coming from Russia (35% of oil, 40% of...     

Patterns of industrialization and the flying geese model: the case of electronics in East Asia

We use the “flying geese” framework to study the change in the geography of comparative advantages in the electronics sector in East Asia, China and the USA. Doubts have been raised about the capacity of the “flying geese” model to interpret the most recent phases of Asian development, in particular as far as progress in the electronics sector is concerned. This paper takes issue against these negative conclusions on both theoretical and empirical grounds. On the theoretical side, the paper takes up the formulation proposed by Kaname Akamatsu, arguing that some of the critical observations raised against the model look to a distorted and simplified version of Akamatsu's original theory. Analyzing the behavior of the “revealed comparative advantage index” per products and area, it is concluded that the “flying geese model” is compatible with manifold industrial development models, increasing interdependence in an integrated area which crucially also includes the US, and that asymmetries and hierarchical order persist across the countries.