Search

This paper presents a novel computational method to determine the distribution of ultimate investors in bilateral FDI stock. The approach employs results from the probabilistic theory of absorbing Markov chains. The method allows for the estimation of a bilateral matrix that provides inward positions by ultimate counterparts for over 100 recipient countries, covering 95% of total FDI stock and including many developing countries. Reconstructing the global FDI network by ultimate investors enables a more accurate and complete snapshot of international production than do standalone bilateral FDI statistics. This has considerable implications for policymaking. It also provides more nuanced context to some contemporary developments such as the trade tensions between the United States, China and others, as well as Brexit. Keywords: ultimate investors, bilateral FDI, conduit FDI, international production, absorbing Markov chains., 1. Introduction 1.1 International production and the challenge of ultimate investors For many years multinational enterprises (MNEs) established their international production presence predominantly through foreign direct investment (FDI), building an [...]

Byline: C. Darlington Prostatic biopsy is the gold standard of diagnosis of prostatic cancer. In the era of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate, finger-guided prostatic biopsy still has a [...]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.051 Byline: Kent Ranson (a), Tyler J. Law (b), Sara Bennett (c) Abstract: Donor funding for health systems financing (HSF) research is inadequate and often poorly aligned with national priorities. This study aimed to generate consensus about a core set of research issues that urgently require attention in order to facilitate policy development. There were three key inputs into the priority setting process: key-informant interviews with health policy makers, researchers, community and civil society representatives across twenty-four low- and middle-income countries in four regions; an overview of relevant reviews to identify research completed to date; and inputs from 12 key informants (largely researchers) at a consultative workshop. Nineteen priority research questions emerged from key-informant interviews. The overview of reviews was instructive in showing which health financing topics have had comparatively little written about them, despite being identified as important by key informants. The questions ranked as most important at the consultative workshop were: 1. How do we develop and implement universal financial protection? 2. What are the pros and cons of the different ways of identifying the poor? 3. To what extent do health benefits reach the poor? 4. What are the pros and cons of implementing demand-side subsidies? 5. What is the cost-effectiveness of service delivery models and health systems strategies? It is hoped that this work on HSF research priorities will complement calls for increased health systems research and evaluation by providing specific suggestions as to where new and existing research resources can best be invested. The list of high priority HSF research questions is being communicated to research funders and researchers in order to seek to influence global patterns of HSF research funding and activity. A 'bottom up' approach to setting global research priorities such as that employed here should ensure that priorities are more sensitive to user needs. Author Affiliation: (a) Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland (b) School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada (c) The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA Article Note: (footnote) [star] Thanks to David Evans, George Gotsadze and Fadi El-Jardali for commenting on the manuscript, and to Di McIntyre, Meng Qingyue and Amanda Glassman for their thorough technical reviews of the paper. We also wish to thank the many colleagues who contributed to the Alliance's priority setting work, including: Delius Asiimwe and Gaspar Munishi (East Africa report); Gonzalo Urcullo, Rodrigo MuA[+ or -]oz and Ricardo Bitran (Latin American and the Caribbean report); Soewarta Kosen, Siripen Supakankunti and Syed Mohamed Aljunid (Southeast Asia report); Fadi El-Jardali, Judy Makhoul, Diana Jamal and Victoria Tchaghchaghian (MENA report); Shirley Williams; the many country-based investigators; and participants in the workshop in Nyon.

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.10.012 Byline: Susmita Dasgupta (a), Craig Meisner (a), David Wheeler (b) Abstract: Obsolete pesticides have accumulated in almost every developing country or economy in transition over the past several decades. Concerned about the risks these chemicals pose to nearby residents, public health and environmental authorities are eager to reduce health threats by removing and decontaminating stockpile sites. However, there are many sites, cleanup can be costly, and public resources are scarce, so decision makers need to set priorities. Under these conditions, it seems sensible to develop a methodology for prioritizing sites and treating them sequentially, as budgetary resources permit. This paper presents a new methodology that develops a cleanup priority index for 1915metric tons of obsolete pesticide formulations at 197 stockpile sites in Tunisia. The approach integrates information on populations at risk, their proximity to stockpiles, and the relative toxic hazards of the stockpiles. What emerges from the Tunisia results is a strategy for sequentially addressing all 197 sites to rapidly reduce potential health damage in a cost-effective way. Author Affiliation: (a) DECRG-EE, MC3-435, The World Bank, 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433, United States (b) Center for Global Development, 1776 Massachusetts Avenue, Washington, DC 20036, United States Article History: Received 6 April 2009; Revised 23 September 2009; Accepted 23 October 2009

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.11.006 Byline: Isabel Gunther Keywords: vulnerability; idiosyncratic and covariate shocks; multilevel modeling; Madagascar Abstract: Households in developing countries are frequently hit by severe idiosyncratic and covariate shocks leading to high consumption volatility. A household's currently observed poverty status might therefore not be a good indicator of the household's general vulnerability to poverty. In the recent years, there has been an emerging literature on the concept and empirical analysis of vulnerability. But because of strong data requirements for vulnerability analysis and limited availability of panel and shock data for developing countries, static poverty analysis still dominates empirical vulnerability studies. In this paper, we propose a simple method to empirically assess the impact of idiosyncratic and covariate shocks on households' vulnerability, which can be applied in a wide context as it relies on more commonly available cross-sectional or short panel data. We empirically illustrate our approach for Madagascar. We show that covariate shocks have a relatively higher impact on rural households, whereas idiosyncratic shocks have a relatively higher impact on urban households' vulnerability. Author Affiliation: Harvard University, MA, USA Article History: Accepted 3 November 2008

Sparked by examples from Bangladesh, Bolivia, Indonesia, and other developing countries, hundreds of microenterprise programs have been started in the United States. Will these US efforts be successful? This paper reviews the evidence and concludes that microenterprise development is much more difficult in the United States than in the developing world. The paper suggests some ways to address the challenges of US microenterprise development. Key words--United States, microenterprise, microfinance, entrepreneurship, community development