Browse by: "2005"

Collective Investment Schemes (CIS) have been one of the most significant developments in financial intermediation during the past few decades. OECD data indicate that CIS assets have been rising sharply as a share of national income and a share of financial assets in most Member countries. In addition to functioning as an effective vehicle for individuals to implement their preferred investment strategies, CIS already play a major role in providing for retirement income. This role is likely to grow in coming years. Overall, the experience of the investing public as well as policy makers has been highly positive. CIS have enabled even fairly small investors to participate in the strong growth of capital markets in the past two decades. CIS make it possible for relatively small...

This paper defends the idea that universities manufacture knowledge as a public good through the “creative destruction” of social capital. The idea is presented as contemporary restatement of the Humboldtian ideal of the unity of research and teaching: Research “creates” (i.e. concentrates) social capital, which is then “destroyed” (i.e. distributed) through teaching. The defense is made against recent attacks to the integrity of the university as an institution associated with postmodernism and the so-called “new production of knowledge”, which would evaluate universities by client-led performance indicators. The emergence of such indicators is considered and critiqued, followed by some constructive suggestions for indicators specifically designed to measure qualities at which universities uniquely excel.

The term “university” has a longstanding history, yet its definition remains highly contentious at the turn of the century. According to conventional scholarship, the first university initially appeared as far back as the 12th century with the formation of the University of Paris and the University of Bologna (circa 1150 AD). Other scholars, however, contend that the university may have begun many centuries earlier, depending on the definition employed (Neave, 1999; Welch and Denman, 1997; Patterson, 1997). The intent of this article is to suggest a classification of universities for the 21st Century, with emphasis placed on the university's role in disseminating and advancing knowledge through scholarship and research. Drawing upon major historic events that have shaped universities in their various forms, this article discusses whether universities are designed to cater to market forces or are catalysts for change in an increasingly “knowledge-based” society.

The last decade has seen a growing increase in policy discourse in many countries on entrepreneurship and innovation with a prominent emphasis on the role to be played by universities. However, it is far from clear to what extent institutional behaviours are influenced by this enterprising policy discourse based on the broad assumption that “knowledge” is the most precious asset for economic growth in the knowledge economy. This article examines the links developing between the universities and innovation processes especially at the regional level as observed in the United Kingdom, highlighting interactions between public policy and institutional behaviour in a multi-level governance (MLG) structure of knowledge production. Different strategic processes of networking between universities and the links universities are developing with Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) and other partners in nine English regions are illustrated in light of recent government policies which influence the resources and strategies of universities. Universities need to be analysed as critical actors in regional development processes, and their wide range of activities and strategies at different geographical levels need to be strategically co-ordinated as part of a territorial development process within the globalising knowledge economy.

This paper is an exercise in dating the Euro area business cycle on a monthly basis. Using a quite flexible interpolation routine, we construct several monthly series of Euro area real GDP, and then apply the Bry-Boschan (1971) procedure. To account for the asymmetry in growth regimes and duration across business cycle phases, we propose to extend this method with a combined amplitude/phase-length criterion ruling out expansionary phases that are short and flat. Applying the extended procedure to US and Euro area data, we are able to replicate approximately the dating decisions of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) and the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR).

The arrival of nuclear energy gave rise to the need, almost half a century ago, to devise a regime of liability in keeping with the new risks associated with this technology: risks that were not only catastrophic, but also insidious, because they were incapable of detection by ordinary human beings. The principles underlying this regime have stood the test of time, even if the accusation is now sometimes made that some of them were also designed to protect an industry in its infancy.

Universities make an economic contribution to their host territory in two ways. Firstly, there is the direct impact of the initial investment and the effects of students and staff spending and universities’ operating expenditure on the surrounding economy. Secondly, universities are also public institutions that carry out missions of higher education, training and knowledge dissemination that contribute to the local accumulation of human capital, as well as missions of research and knowledge creation that promote technological progress in the host territory. However, this contribution has often been neglected in impact studies. The aim of this article will therefore be to investigate the impact that the creation of new universities has in terms of knowledge spillovers on the economic development of their host territory.

This report focuses on one environmental instrument which is part of the UK’s wider programme of policies to deal with its various obligations to control climate change. The instrument is the Climate Change Levy (CCL) which takes the form of a tax on energy. However, the CCL cannot be viewed in isolation – it is part of a fairly elaborate package of measures, and its interaction with the other instruments in that package need to be understood. Accordingly, we first set out a brief history of the UK’s approach to climate change control, and describe the various components of the policy package. A detailed history of the CCL is then provided, and this is followed by an analysis of the features of the CCL, focusing particularly on the political factors that influenced its design, and the various reactions to it. Finally, we look at the likely future of the CCL in light of developments in climate change policy in the wider Europe.