Search

Begin New Search Topic Globalization Publishing Institution Center for Global Development (CGD)

21. Africa's Private Sector: What's Wrong with the Business Environment and What to Do About It

Author:
Vijaya Ramachandran, Manju Kedia Shah, and Alan Gelb
Publication Date:
03-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Why has the private sector failed to thrive in much of sub-Saharan Africa? Drawing on a unique set of enterprise surveys, we identify inadequate infrastructure (especially unreliable electricity and poor quality roads) and burdensome regulations as the biggest obstacles to doing business. We find as well that the private sector in many countries is dominated by ethnic minorities, which inhibits competition and lowers demand for a better business environment. Solutions include investing in infrastructure, providing risk guarantees, and reforming regulations to lower the cost of doing business, as well as increasing access to education for would-be entrepreneurs.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Emerging Markets, Globalization, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
Africa

22. Making Markets for Merit Goods: The Political Economy of Antiretrovirals

Author:
Ethan B. Kapstein and Josh Busby
Publication Date:
08-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
This paper examines the role of policy entrepreneurs and global activists in shaping the international market for antiretroviral drugs to combat HIV/AIDS. When ARVs first came on the market in the 1990s they were exceedingly expensive; the cost of treatment was upwards of $10,000 per year. These drugs were thus accessible only to those patients who had high incomes. But in 2006, the “international community,” meeting at a United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS), made an astonishing pledge to those who were infected with HIV. It proclaimed that there should be universal access to ARV treatment. This UNGASS, following up on an earlier historic UN special session devoted entirely to AIDS in 2001, marked the first time in history that the international community pledged itself to chronic care for the ill, which in this case includes the approximately 30 million people around the world estimated to be HIV positive. How do we explain the transformation of ARVs from private goods, which only a few could afford, into merit goods that were (at least declaratively) to be made available to everyone? In other words, how does a norm of “universal access to treatment”—that no person should be denied these life-extending drugs—become the ethical basis for global public policy with respect to pharmaceutical allocation? What are the lessons of the ARV story for other global issues? These are the primary questions we explore in this paper. Briefly, we argue that the policy entrepreneurs and activists who promoted the creation of a universal access to treatment regime—of the transformation of ARVs into global merit goods—relied on a combination of moral arguments and ideas with favorable material circumstances. From the ethical perspective, the task of these entrepreneurs was to convince the “international community” that access to ARVs was a “human right,” or conversely to convince decision-makers that it was morally wrong to allocate these life-enhancing drugs solely on the basis of ability to pay. But from a material standpoint, these arguments were greatly facilitated by the lowering prices of ARVs caused by a combination of differential pricing (that is, lower prices for drugs in the developing world than in the advanced welfare states) and competition from generics producers, coupled with increases in foreign aid spending devoted to HIV/AIDS and other diseases.
Topic:
Globalization, Health, and Markets
Political Geography:
United Nations

23. A Fresh Look at Global Governance: Exploring Objective Criteria for Representation

Author:
Vijaya Ramachandran, Enrique Rueda-Sabater, and Robin Kraft
Publication Date:
02-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
The geopolitical world of the 21st century is very different than that of the post–World War II era. In this new world order, what constitutes a system of global governance? We argue that it has to balance representation, which is made credible by the inclusion of key parts of the global community, and effectiveness, which means involving as small a number of actors as possible while having access to the resources—and clout—to turn decisions/intentions into action/results. In this paper, we propose simple, fundamental criteria—based on global shares of GDP and population—around which global governance might be organized. We analyze the role that these criteria would assign to different countries and compare them with some of the key components of the system of governance currently in place—the Bretton Woods institutions and the United Nations. We also examine the implications of our analysis for membership in the G-20 and the OECD. We find major disparities, which suggest the need for fundamental changes in sharp contrast to the incremental changes that are currently being considered. Overall, our analysis points to the need for a more comprehensive approach, and for much more than incremental solutions.
Topic:
Globalization, Government, International Organization, International Political Economy, and Political Theory
Political Geography:
United Nations

24. Multilateralism Beyond Doha

Author:
Arvind Subramanian and Aaditya Mattoo
Publication Date:
10-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
There is a fundamental shift taking place in the world economy to which the multilateral trading system has failed to adapt. The Doha process focused on issues of limited significance while the burning issues of the day were not even on the negotiating agenda. The paper advances five propositions: the traditional negotiating dynamic, driven by private sector interests largely in the rich countries, is running out of steam; the world economy is moving broadly from conditions of relative abundance to relative scarcity, and so economic security has become a paramount concern for consumers, workers, and ordinary citizens; international economic integration can contribute to enhanced security; addressing these new concerns–relating to food, energy and economic security-requires a wider agenda of multilateral cooperation, involving not just the WTO but other multilateral institutions; and despite shifts in economic power across countries, the commonality of interests and scope for give-and-take on these new issues make multilateral cooperation worth attempting.
Topic:
International Relations, Economics, Globalization, International Political Economy, International Trade and Finance, Markets, and Privatization
Political Geography:
Middle East

25. Generating Political Priority for Public Health Causes in Developing Countries: Implications From a Study on Maternal Mortality

Author:
Jeremy Shiffman
Publication Date:
05-2007
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Why do some serious health issues—such as HIV/AIDS—get considerable attention and others—such as malaria and collapsing health systems—get very little? Why and under what conditions do political leaders consider an issue worthy of sustained attention, and back up that attention with money and other resources? In this CGD Brief, visiting fellow Jeremy Shiffman, an associate professor of public administration at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University, discusses nine factors that influenced the degree to which national leaders in five countries made one public health issue—maternal mortality—a political priority. Pregnancy-related complications are the leading cause of mortality globally among adult women of reproductive age, with more than half a million deaths annually. But in some countries maternal health has become a priority and maternal deaths have fallen, while in other countries this has not yet occurred. Drawing on his comparison of these countries, Shiffman offers recommendations for public health priority-setting in developing countries. His bottom line: attaining public health goals is as much a political as it is a medical or technical challenge; success requires not only appropriate technical interventions but also effective political strategies.
Topic:
Globalization, Health, Political Economy, and Third World

26. Stormy Days on an Open Field: Asymmetries in the Global Economy

Author:
Nancy Birdsall
Publication Date:
02-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Openness is not necessarily good for the poor. Reducing trade protection has not brought growth to today's poorest countries, and open capital markets have not been good for the poorest households in emerging market economies. In this paper I present evidence on these two points. First, countries highly dependent on primary exports two decades ago, despite their substantial engagement in trade and a marked decline in their tariff rates in the 1990s, have failed to grow. Second, within high-debt emerging market economies the financial crises of the last decade, whether induced by domestic policy problems or global contagion, have been especially costly for the poor (in welfare terms if not in terms of absolute income losses). I discuss the asymmetries in the global economy that help explain why countries and people cannot always compete on equal terms on the “level playing field” of the global economy.
Topic:
Economics, Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Poverty, and Financial Crisis

27. Weak States and Global Threats: Assessing Evidence of Spillovers

Author:
Stewart Patrick
Publication Date:
01-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
A key motivation behind recent donor attention and financial resources devoted to developing countries is the presumed connection between weak and failing states, on the one hand, and a variety of transnational threats, on the other. Indeed, it has become conventional wisdom that poorly performing states generate multiple cross-border “spillovers,” including terrorism, weapons proliferation, organized crime, regional instability, global pandemics, and energy insecurity. What is striking is how little empirical evidence underpins such sweeping assertions. A closer look suggests that the connection between state weakness and global threats is less clear and more variable than typically assumed. Both the type and extent of “spillovers” depend in part on whether the weakness in question is a function of state capacity, will, or a combination of the two. Moreover, a preliminary review suggests that some trans-border threats are more likely to emerge not from the weakest states but from stronger states that possess narrower but critical gaps in capacity and will. Crafting an effective U.S. and international strategy towards weak states and the cross-border spillovers they sometimes generate will depend on a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms linking these two sets of phenomena. The challenge for analysts and policymakers will be to get greater clarity about which states are responsible for which threats and design development and other external interventions accordingly. This working paper represents an initial foray in this direction, suggesting avenues for future research and policy development.
Topic:
Security, Globalization, Terrorism, and Weapons of Mass Destruction