Economists can tut-tut all they want about working-class people refusing to buy into the benefits of globalisation, but as social scientists we surely need to think about the predictable political consequences of economic policies. Too much globalisation, without domestic safety nets and other policies that can adequately protect globalisation's losers, will inevitably invite a political backlash. Indeed, it is already upon us. - downloaded to Tab S2

Part of the White House and the World 2016 Briefing Book -- Well-established European development finance institutions (DFIs) are providing integrated services for businesses...-- debt and equity financing, risk mitigation, and technical assistance. .. emerging-market actors — including China, India, Brazil, and Malaysia — have dramatically increased financing activities in developing regions such as Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa. As the needs of developing countries have changed, so has the political and economic environment in the US. First, traditional development dynamics are shifting rapidly from a donor-recipient aid relationship to win-win partnerships involving public and private actors. Second, most US aid agencies typically are not positioned to address many pressing development priorities, such as expanding economic opportunities in frontier markets. Third, the US development assistance budget has become increasingly constrained, with growing pressure to cut programs. Within this context, we assess the need for a modern, full-service US Development Finance Corporation and provide a series of options for how the next US president could structure such an institution consistent with bipartisan congressional support and budgetary realities. For such a USDFC, we propose below potential products, services, and tools; size, scale, and staffing requirements; governance structures and oversight functions; performance metrics; and capital structure models. We conclude with a notional implementation road map that includes the required US executive and legislative actions. -- downloaded pdf to Note

João Amador, Filippo di Mauro -- Global value chains (GVCs) - referring to the cross-border flows of goods, investment, services, know-how and people associated with international production networks - have transformed the world. Their emergence has resulted in a complete reconfiguration of world trade, bearing a strong impact on the assessment of competitiveness and economic policy. The contributions to this eBook are based on research carried out within the scope of the Eurosystem Competitiveness Research Network (CompNet), bringing together participants from EU national central banks, universities and international organisations interested in competitiveness issues. The mapping of GVCs and full awareness about their implications are essential to informed public debate and improved economic policy.-- downloaded pdf to Note

downloaded pdf to Note

Lawrence H. Summers and Lant H. Pritchett, The American Economic Review, Vol. 83, No. 2, Papers and Proceedings of the Hundred and Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association (May, 1993), pp. 383-389 -- review of World Bank research on results of IMF/World Bank programs -- downloaded pdf to Note

Abstract of introductory article -- Causal evidence on microcredit impacts informs theory, practice, and debates about its effectiveness as a development tool. The six randomized evaluations in this volume use a variety of sampling, data collection, experimental design, and econometric strategies to identify causal effects of expanded access to microcredit on borrowers and/or communities. These methods are deployed across an impressive range of locations—six countries on four continents, urban and rural areas—borrower characteristics, loan characteristics, and lender characteristics. Summarizing and interpreting results across studies, we note a consistent pattern of modestly positive, but not transformative, effects. We also discuss directions for future research. -- broad conclusion to be expected contra the hype -- but focus still seems to be on *credit* (with assumptions re micro and SME entrepreneurs and business formation) rather than access to services -- also question whether the former Yugoslavia study really dealt with "micro", likely the sort of labeling of SMEs as micro like Aftab's programs