What Drives the Private Provision of Security: Evidence from Russian Regions
Economic inequality is increasing both within and across countries. Growing inequality has negative economic, social and political consequences, it constrains economic growth, undermines social cohesion and political stability. Eradicating causes of inequality and turning structural barriers to equality into opportunities is fundamental for generating strong, sustainable, balanced and inclusive growth. Transition to this growth model will depend on G20 coherent policy actions globally and nationally.
In the run up to the St. Petersburg G20 summit the Civil 20 initiated preparing a report and recommendations to G20 focused on surmounting the risks originating from growing income inequality. A special Task Force, bringing together experts from G20 member countries has been established to draft the report. Presented and discussed within the Russian G20 Presidency Civil Society Track (www.g20civil.com), the report provides an independent analysis and proposals for a dialogue between a wide range of stakeholders and the G20 governors on the G20 concerted policies and actions to improve economic equality within their countries and beyond.
This set of policy recommendations on how G20 can address inequality takes full account of the existing authoritative, best available, consensus, analysis and evidence of the IMF, OECD, UNDP, other international organizations and relevant scholarly, civil society and policy communities, as summarized above. It builds directly upon the extensive evidence and analysis of the causes and practical policy cures for income inequality in the G20 member countries, as identified in the country reports prepared by and for members of the Civil 20 Task Force on Equity (currently including Australia, Canada, China, France, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Korea, Russia, Turkey and the US).
The Civil 20 propose that G20 leaders at their St. Petersburg summit can act together to improve income and economic equality within their countries and beyond by agreeing the Saint Petersburg Initiative for Strong, Sustainable, Balanced and Inclusive Growth affirming the value of equality and inclusion along with economic growth and efficiency.
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) is one of the key platforms of the multilateral dialogue on global agenda issues in the Asia-Pacific region. Notwithstanding its regional character, the annual APEC leaders` summits significance is comparable with that of the key global governance institutions, such as the G8 and G20, summits. With increasing integration and enhanced economic relationships as well as established interaction pattern the APEC influence on regional and global economic agenda is growing. In spite of the fact that APEC initially positioned itself as a “free group of economics” not a political association, the member states step-by-step turn to the most acute worldwide political issues, which is reflected in the leaders` statements made during the summit. The analysis of the APEC 2013 summit which was held within the Indonesian presidency on 7-8 October 2013 on Bali provides an insight into the main drivers of the APEC agenda. Given that currently all countries face similar economic and social challenges: low and stalling economic growth, need to pursue fiscal consolidation, persistent structural unemployment, widening income disparities, base erosion and profit shifting as well as tax evasion, climate change negative consequences etc, it`s useful to analyze the measures implemented at the regional level (APEC), as well as the global level (G20). A comparison with the G20 is largely determined shared challenges and by the intersecting memberships: almost half of the members of the institutions participate in both fora, namely Australia, Canada, China, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Russia and the United States. The recent APEC and G20 agendas aim to coordinate actions to resolve the shared problems and move towards new growth models. The analysis is based on the key summit documents - Bali Declaration “Resilient Asia-Pacific, Engine of Global Growth”, Joint Ministerial Statement, leaders` statements and accompanying documents. The analysis permits to identify the vector of APEC agenda development.
This paper outlines the phenomenon of «fear» as a component of Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) philosophy. The author makes an attempt to submit the concept of the «rational» fear as the basis of political philosophy of the English philosopher, with a special attention given to some «problematic» place of this concept.
On May 18-19, 2012, at the presidential retreat in Camp David in Maryland, U.S. president Barack Obama hosted the 38th annual G8 summit. The leaders discussed global economic growth, development, and peace and security. After less than 24 hours of face-to-face time among the leaders, they issued communiqué of only five pages. However, Camp David was a significant success. The leaders came together to effectively address the most pressing issues of the day while setting the direction for the summits that were to follow, including the summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Chicago, the G20 in Los Cabos, Mexico, and the Rio+20 Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. That success was propelled by several causes. The first is the set of strong global shocks were particularly relevant to a number of items on the agenda. This included the newest installment of the euro-crisis, spikes in oil and food prices, and the escalating violence in Syria. The second is the failure of the other major international institutions to address these challenges. The third is the club’s dedication to the promotion of democracy and its significance on issues such as the democratic transition in the Middle East and North Africa. The fourth is the high relative capabilities of G8 members, fuelled by the strength of the U.S. dollar, the Japanese yen and the British pound. The fifth is the domestic political control, capital, continuity, competence and commitment of the leaders in attendance. Camp David saw several G8 leaders returning for their sixth or seventh summit and leaders with a secure majority mandate and control of their legislative houses at home. Finally, the constricted participation at the remote and secluded Camp David Summit, a unique and original advantage of the G8 summit style, allowed for more spontaneous conversation and interpersonal bonds. Together, these interconnected causes brought the G8 back, as a broader, bigger, bolder centre of effective global governance.
The post-Cold War Arctic has seen a transformation from military tension and a focus on national security to a concern for environmental and human security. As a result of this, the globalized Arctic has a high level of peace and stability, maintained by international cooperation between the Arctic states, northern indigenous peoples, sub-national governments and local actors. There has also been a shift from environmental protection to economic activities and, consequently, states easily trump other interests. Now, in the Arctic, these challenges require fresh thinking on a local and global scale. Regional wars, the 'war on terror', and economic crises have posed new threats to Northern security order.
The article is devoted to the investigation of genesis of regular army as a political institution in conditions of political transit in Libya. The chronological scope of the study covers the historical period from 1951, when a sovereign Libyan state with monarchical form of government appeared, until 2011, when Libyan Jamahiriya ceased to exist. We scrutinize problems of collaboration of army with traditional and modern institutions of Libyan society and state; participation of army in development and implementation of domestic and foreign policy. We also examine how system of checks and balances of participation of army in the political process was established and how it was functioning during in the monarchical (1951-1969), Republican (1969-1976) and Jamahiriya (1976-2011) period. The events of 2011-2014 demonstrate the conservation of discovered trends and patterns of socio-political development of the institution of regular army in the new Libyan state.
Using the data from the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS), this paper investigates income mobility in Russia during the period of rapid economic growth (2000–2005). Employing a broad set of mobility indices, we show that there is much mobility in household incomes from one year to the next and over longer periods in Russia. Both relative and absolute mobility in Russia are significantly higher than in Western countries. We demonstrate that income growth in Russia was strongly pro-poor in 2000–2005. Incomes of the relatively poor were growing faster than incomes of the relatively rich. However, this inequality-reducing effect was almost exactly offset by changes in the relative positions of individuals and the overall reduction in cross-sectional inequality was merely modest.