Search results

This paper aims to show how the term competitiveness has been applied and adapted since Michael Porter made it respectable in economics, strategic management and consulting. This paper connects the concept with new developments in the theory of the firm, theories of growth and, finally, with Beyond GDP literature.

This paper distinguishes between input and output competitiveness, developing a set of indictors for both. Countries are ranked according to costs, structure and capabilities (drivers of competitiveness) as well as according to economic, social and ecological performance (performance pillars). Finally, outcome competitiveness is explained by the individual drivers, using econometrics and principal component analyses.

Defining competitiveness as the ability of a country or nation to deliver Beyond GDP goals changes the policy conclusions drawn from the quest for competitiveness. Policies to reduce costs prove inferior relative to “high-road strategies” built on skills, innovation and supporting institutions. Ecological ambition and social investment are not costs, but enablers of competitiveness for high-income countries.

Connecting the well-known term competitiveness with Beyond GDP goals is a new approach. It is very different from the old concept of cost competitiveness criticized heavily by Paul Krugman. Supplying a set of indicators to measure “low-road” and “high-road” competitiveness leads to important new policy conclusions.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the European Framework for Measuring Progress (e-Frame). It is a coordination project funded by the European Commission (EC) which builds on the latest political directions with particular attention to the priorities identified by the Europe 2020 strategy.

e-Frame aims at contributing to empower the European debate on “GDP and beyond”, taking a broad approach by looking together on social, economic, environmental and global dimensions. Main general actions are coordinating initiatives of different actors to foster the debate by involving all relevant stakeholders through different communication channels and networking activities; streamlining the stocktaking on what has been reached so far and organizing dissemination events.

The e-Frame project is largely contributing to the gross domestic product (GDP) and beyond debate. Its main outcomes range from thematic achievements to more strategically and politically oriented documents. Particular attention is devoted to the challenges that are emerging from the stocktaking activities carried out within the project and that have been conceptually divided in those pertaining to the official statistical production and those more related to the possible interactions between official and non-official statistics.

e-Frame original features are proposing new ways for delivering information to a wide audience of experts as well as to the society, at large; in defining guidelines for the use of existing well-being indicators by policy-makers; identifying new topics and emerging needs to be put at the center of future research agendas by the EC and by the European Statistical Systems in the area of measuring well-being, societal progress and sustainability.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the suitability of using gross domestic product (GDP) as a proper indicator for sustainability in a given national economy and to identify the main features that a proper measure of sustainability (composed by a set of indicators) should incorporate. After showing the inconveniences of using GDP as an indicator of sustainability for national economies, the authors aim to present complementary indicators to GDP per capita to do this task. They also aim to calculate and discuss the efficiency of OECD countries in terms of achieving sustainable development.

A theoretical framework is proposed based on recent economic studies about sustainability and also on the principles of Catholic social thought. Once complementary indicators to GDP in order to measure sustainability have been proposed, the econometric method data envelopment analysis (DEA) is used to perform an efficiency analysis of the three dimensions of sustainability (social, economic and environmental).

GDP alone is not a proper indicator of sustainability for national economies. Relevant economic literature and also specific documents from Catholic social thought can help when identifying complementary indicators to GDP in order to assess sustainability. Developed economies are able to be efficient in achieving the three dimensions of sustainability at the same time.

The three dimensions of sustainability considered in this paper are the fundamental ones, and can be complemented with new ones. A comparison with other sustainability indices could bring new insights for further research.

In this paper the authors combine recent economic literature with Papal encyclicals and documents from the General Congregations of the Society of Jesus, in order to provide a comprehensive set of indicators to measure sustainability. A DEA analysis has been carried out to calculate efficiency in achieving sustainability for OECD countries.

This study aims to examine the uptake of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the Asia Pacific region and to explore the extent to which countries in the region are transitioning towards a sustainable enterprise economy (SEE) and the links between the two, thereby connecting the uptake of CSR at the organisational level to the configuration and transformation of societies.

In order to examine the uptake of CSR in the Asia Pacific region and assess the extent to which countries are transitioning towards the SEE, this study compiles data from a selection of CSR‐related indicators that are globally harmonised and globally recognised as well as national performance indicators that not only set the operational context for organisations but also help to measure the ultimate impacts of policies, practices and activities by organisations on national conditions.

Based on the preliminary study undertaken into global national indicators in the Asia Pacific region, there is a need for more comprehensive indicators that capture key elements of a SEE. The study envisages the creation of a “Global SEE dashboard” of actual, real‐time key performance indicators that can help facilitate stewardship by societies towards the Global SEE.

By underscoring the needs, opportunities and challenges for CSR capacity‐building in the Asia Pacific region and for countries to transition effectively towards the SEE, this study adds value to the efforts of public and private policy makers concerned with CSR, sustainability and governance as well as practitioners and members of civil society interested in responsible global citizenship.

This paper aims to provide an overview of environmental regulation and recent trends and developments in this area, rooted in the practical regulatory implementation activities of EPAs worldwide and drawing connection to sustainability, environmental risks, economics and environmental justice.

The design and methodology in developing “Better (Environmental) Regulation” is addressed drawn on experiences from different regulatory systems. It addresses the linkages between environment, economy, regulation and sustainability and adopts and develops Sparrow's approach to a focus on tackling harms.

A range of challenges in policy and practice terms – e.g. economic growth versus sustainability – is described. Arguments against the political economy convention of reducing burdens are made and a spectrum of compliance for regulators is offered, leading to a proposed agenda to help deliver better regulation generally.

A major challenge in arguing for an anti‐burden approach is the lack of a general ecosystem services approach and the dearth of valuation data to validate industry claims, demonstrate the costs of compliance and non‐environment and the value of protection.

The argument is presented that environmental regulation is of fundamental value not only to the environment per se but to tackling climate change and protecting society at large.

Hitherto there has been very little in the literature from a practitioner perspective, analysing and proposing improvements to environmental regulation in practice while preserving and securing environmental and sustainability policy objectives. This paper should support and encourage policy makers and implementers in improving practice.

The purpose of this paper is to refer to ecological economics using two meanings of the term “ecological”. In the strict scientific sense, ecological economics refers to an economic system that is consistent with and honors the basic principles of ecology, which, ultimately, are identical with what the authors call the systemic principles of life. In a broader sense ecological economics refers to economic theory and practice that see the economy as operating within, rather than dominating, the spheres of nature, society, and culture.

The authors distill four fundamental principles for ecological economics based on systems theory of life and philosophy of organism. The four principles are; nested systems, self-generating networks, open systems, and cognitive interactions. The authors discuss how these principles can be applied to design an ecological economic system that is life-enhancing on individual, social and ecological levels.

The authors argue that ecological economics should give priority to activities that maximize well-being of human and non-human beings, as well as entire ecosystems, and that its central purpose should be to serve the life processes in social and ecological systems.

In this paper, the authors connect ecological economics to systems theory and come up with principles relevant for developing economic theory and practice within, rather than dominating, the spheres of nature, society, and culture.

This paper seeks to reflect on the impacts of the pandemic on the management of tourist destinations, discussing the role of destination-management organizations in the tourism development model, as well as the challenges that these organizations must address to ensure an effective construction of a more sustainable and competitive tourism.

The methodology is based on a literature review linking destination management with pandemic and post-pandemic responses.

The COVID-19 pandemic represents an unprecedent shock to the tourism industry's growth model since World War II, challenging tourism stakeholders (destinations and companies) with several threats and opportunities to their future competitiveness. In addition to the massive impacts in terms of business development, the abrupt reduction of tourism demand and the significative loss of jobs, the pandemic also caused significant disruption in terms of destination-management models. In less than four months, the focus of Governments and Destination Management Organizations shifted from defining development models compatible with improving the quality of life of residents due to the emergence of the so-called overtourism phenomenon, to the urgent need to support the industry's survival, to preserve jobs and ensure conditions of safety for tourists and workers.

Demonstrates the need for a profound change in the paradigm of destination management so that the sector is prepared to face future shocks. It also proposes further discussion on the role of destination management in the recovery process of the tourism sector in global terms, given the challenges that these organizations face. The article also considers the ways in which destination management can be a fundamental tool in the process of building a more inclusive, sustainable and competitive future.

“It should also be noted that the objective of convergence and equal distribution, including across under-performing areas, can hinder efforts to generate growth. Contrariwise, the objective of competitiveness can exacerbate regional and social inequalities, by targeting efforts on zones of excellence where projects achieve greater returns (dynamic major cities, higher levels of general education, the most advanced projects, infrastructures with the heaviest traffic, and so on). If cohesion policy and the Lisbon Strategy come into conflict, it must be borne in mind that the former, for the moment, is founded on a rather more solid legal foundation than the latter” European Commission (2005, p. 9)Adaptation of Cohesion Policy to the Enlarged Europe and the Lisbon and Gothenburg Objectives.

This study investigates the existence of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) for deforestation for Ghana over the 1962–2018 the time period.

The study employs a time-varying approach, the bootstrap rolling window Granger causality test to achieve its set objectives.

The results from our study reveals an inverted “N” shape EKC for deforestation, implying that deforestation will initially decrease with increases in economic growth up to a certain income threshold and increases with further increases in economic growth beyond this income threshold up to a higher income threshold and then decrease with further increases in economic beyond the higher income threshold.

The results from the study project show that over time economic growth can serve as a natural panacea to cure and mitigate the ills of deforestation that have plagued Ghana's forests over the years.

The results further highlight the important role of strong institutions in fighting the deforestation menace.

The originality of this study lies in its methodology which allows for feedback from deforestation to the economy. This is in contrast to earlier studies on the EKC for deforestation which allowed causality only from deforestation to the economy.

The purpose of this paper is to present a survey by GLOBESCAN for Ethical Markets Media, LLC which was released at the “Beyond GDP” Conference in the European Parliament, 19‐20 November.

The methodology is survey based.

Three‐quarters of people in ten countries agree that their governments should look beyond economics and include health, social and environmental statistics in measuring national progress.

This paper is contrary to the accepted view of appropriate national growth measures.