It is late 2016. All indicators point to a world economy that will remain weak next year and in the longer term, in advanced and developing countries alike. Governments are feeling the pressure from voters to deliver faster economic growth--and plenty of jobs.
In my view, that would be a mistake. The fate of the United States and the fate of the world are really in our hands. If you are an independent, please do not sit out this election. It is much too important.
Is this true? The short answer is no. It is true that Latin America has been affected by the ups and downs of the global economy: The regional economy was basically flat in 2015, and is projected to shrink by 0.5 percent this year. But this is not the main story.
Weather and economics are similar in that they are difficult to forecast in the near term but the job gets easier the further out you look. For example, we may or may not have a white Christmas, no one knows, but the long term the forecast is warm and warmer.
What is the common ground between the economic prosperity of the Netherlands in the XVII-XVIII centuries, nineteenth century England, twentieth century U.S. and, more recently, countries such as South Korea, Singapore and Israel?
The Pope is to be commended for taking global climate change seriously, and for drawing more world attention to the issue. There is much about the encyclical that is commendable, but where it drifts into matters of public policy, I fear that it is -- unfortunately -- not helpful.
The Luxembourg-based European Investment Bank Institute has announced that Sir Anthony B. Atkinson (Nuffield College, Oxford) will receive the 2015 EIB Outstanding Contribution Award for excellence in economic and social research.
Now is an important moment to think carefully about the path ahead for the much-maligned and much-celebrated IPCC, because in early October of this year, the 195 member countries of the IPCC will meet in plenary in Dubrovnik, Croatia, to elect a new Chair.
Global energy consumption is on a path to grow 30-50 percent over the next 25 years, bringing with it, in many countries, increased local air pollution, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and oil consumption, as well as higher energy prices.
It is ironic, offensive, and sad that anyone would suggest that my support of Harvard's divestment position is somehow tied to my outside engagements. That suggestion -- and the recent threats I have received -- defies logic and is contradicted by the record.