Europe > Switzerland

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 11 items for :

  • Type: Journal Issue x
  • Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth x
Clear All Modify Search
Ruchir Agarwal
,
Patrick Gaulé
, and
Geoff Smith
This paper studies the impact of U.S. immigration barriers on global knowledge production. We present four key findings. First, among Nobel Prize winners and Fields Medalists, migrants to the U.S. play a central role in the global knowledge network—representing 20-33% of the frontier knowledge producers. Second, using novel survey data and hand-curated life-histories of International Math Olympiad (IMO) medalists, we show that migrants to the U.S. are up to six times more productive than migrants to other countries—even after accounting for talent during one’s teenage years. Third, financing costs are a key factor preventing foreign talent from migrating abroad to pursue their dream careers, particularly for talent from developing countries. Fourth, certain ‘push’ incentives that reduce immigration barriers—by addressing financing constraints for top foreign talent—could increase the global scientific output of future cohorts by 42 percent. We concludeby discussing policy options for the U.S. and the global scientific community.
International Monetary Fund

Abstract

The past year was one of growing economic anxiety tied to skepticism about both economic integration and an international approach to economic policy making. To help make globalization work for all, the IMF focused on providing policy advice in many macro-critical areas.

International Monetary Fund

Abstract

The past year was one of growing economic anxiety tied to skepticism about both economic integration and an international approach to economic policy making. To help make globalization work for all, the IMF focused on providing policy advice in many macro-critical areas.

International Monetary Fund

Abstract

The past year was one of growing economic anxiety tied to skepticism about both economic integration and an international approach to economic policy making. To help make globalization work for all, the IMF focused on providing policy advice in many macro-critical areas.

International Monetary Fund

Abstract

The past year was one of growing economic anxiety tied to skepticism about both economic integration and an international approach to economic policy making. To help make globalization work for all, the IMF focused on providing policy advice in many macro-critical areas.

International Monetary Fund

Abstract

The past year was one of growing economic anxiety tied to skepticism about both economic integration and an international approach to economic policy making. To help make globalization work for all, the IMF focused on providing policy advice in many macro-critical areas.

International Monetary Fund

Abstract

The past year was one of growing economic anxiety tied to skepticism about both economic integration and an international approach to economic policy making. To help make globalization work for all, the IMF focused on providing policy advice in many macro-critical areas.

International Monetary Fund
The Fund has been operating under a flat real resource envelope for the past six years. With continued efforts to maximize the use of available resources, spending in FY 17 is projected to reach 99 percent of the net administrative budget, and a low vacancy rate has helped stabilize overtime at 11 percent. Internal savings and reallocations have allowed the Fund to dedicate more resources to country work, including capacity development, without requiring an increase in the approved budget—apart from $6 million provided in FY 17 to cover rising security costs. An unchanged real net administrative budget in FY 18, despite deeper Fund engagement in a number of areas, as well as increased costs for corporate modernization. Accordingly, the budget proposal incorporates significant savings from reallocations and efficiency gains to fund new demands, as well as a further increase in the upfront allocation of carry-forward funds by about $10 million. The broad themes of the proposal are: (i) more intensive country work with a shift from surveillance to programs, but net savings in field offices; (ii) significant policy and analytical work on the financial sector and the role of the Fund (global safety net, facilities, and quotas), albeit less than in FY 17, with more work on structural issues and new challenges; (iii) funding for transforming IT and HR services, offset by central savings; and (iv) enhanced risk mitigation and knowledge management (KM), with the establishment of a KM unit to support cross-country analysis and knowledge transfer. At this stage, a flat resource envelope is assumed also for the medium term, contingent on continued reprioritization and a broadly unchanged global economic environment. Upward pressure on resources will arise from growing capacity development activities and certain revenue losses. Savings are expected from the TransformIT initiative and internal efficiency gains. But for the budget to remain flat, the Fund will need to continuously reprioritize and adjust its activities to make room for new demands. Even then, a more challenging global environment, with a further ramping up of Fund lending, or significant demands for deeper engagement in other areas, would put significant strains on resources over the medium term. The proposed capital budget envelope for FY 18–20 remains broadly unchanged from current levels. Some frontloading, however, is planned for the first two years, due to the cyclical nature of these investments and to accommodate strategic IT projects.
International Monetary Fund
new common evaluation framework for the Fund’s capacity development (CD) activities. The new common evaluation framework is intended to streamline current practices and increase comparability and use of results by adopting for all CD evaluations a common four-step process that includes use of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) evaluation criteria. Around this common approach, there is flexibility to adapt evaluations to reflect the wide range of CD activities. Key elements of the framework are grouped around the objectives of: producing shorter, more focused, and more comparable evaluations; improving the information supporting evaluations;spending the same level of resources on evaluations while allocating these scarce resources more efficiently; and using the information from evaluations to alter practices or shift the targeting of CD resources.