Agrégateur de flux

The debt situation in developing countries (low- and middle-income countries) has come under immense stress. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank have estimated that the proportion of low-income countries (LICs) that are at high risk of debt distress or are already in debt distress has increased from 30 per cent in 2015 to more than 50 per cent in 2024 (IMF, 2024). About 25 per cent of middle-income countries (MICs) are also at risk. There are many reasons for this, including the Covid-19 pandemic and the climate crisis. However, some countries have taken on excessive debt in the good times, in some cases on unfavourable terms. The rise in interest rates over the last two years has further increased the debt burden and made refinancing more difficult. Despite this mounting debt crisis, recent debt restructurings have been slow to materialise and has so far been limlited to very few countries.

The debt situation in developing countries (low- and middle-income countries) has come under immense stress. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank have estimated that the proportion of low-income countries (LICs) that are at high risk of debt distress or are already in debt distress has increased from 30 per cent in 2015 to more than 50 per cent in 2024 (IMF, 2024). About 25 per cent of middle-income countries (MICs) are also at risk. There are many reasons for this, including the Covid-19 pandemic and the climate crisis. However, some countries have taken on excessive debt in the good times, in some cases on unfavourable terms. The rise in interest rates over the last two years has further increased the debt burden and made refinancing more difficult. Despite this mounting debt crisis, recent debt restructurings have been slow to materialise and has so far been limlited to very few countries.

Digital technologies are used in arguably all sectors of the economy and the private sphere. They connect people all over the world, alter production structures and facilitate new business models. As the digitalisation of the economy has the potential to profoundly change global economic interactions, it is likely to also change distributional outcomes. This chapter analyses possible distributional consequences of the globalised digital economy along different dimensions, including intra- and intergenerational socioeconomic distributions and the distribution of political control. We discuss the resulting national and international policy options to address potentially undesired distributional consequences. Specifically, we offer empirical predictions that can be evaluated against normative theories of justice, therby contributing to the analysisof justice in global economic governance. Our conjectures build on the application of basic economic theory to what we consider characteristic, specific features of the digital economy.

Digital technologies are used in arguably all sectors of the economy and the private sphere. They connect people all over the world, alter production structures and facilitate new business models. As the digitalisation of the economy has the potential to profoundly change global economic interactions, it is likely to also change distributional outcomes. This chapter analyses possible distributional consequences of the globalised digital economy along different dimensions, including intra- and intergenerational socioeconomic distributions and the distribution of political control. We discuss the resulting national and international policy options to address potentially undesired distributional consequences. Specifically, we offer empirical predictions that can be evaluated against normative theories of justice, therby contributing to the analysisof justice in global economic governance. Our conjectures build on the application of basic economic theory to what we consider characteristic, specific features of the digital economy.

Digital technologies are used in arguably all sectors of the economy and the private sphere. They connect people all over the world, alter production structures and facilitate new business models. As the digitalisation of the economy has the potential to profoundly change global economic interactions, it is likely to also change distributional outcomes. This chapter analyses possible distributional consequences of the globalised digital economy along different dimensions, including intra- and intergenerational socioeconomic distributions and the distribution of political control. We discuss the resulting national and international policy options to address potentially undesired distributional consequences. Specifically, we offer empirical predictions that can be evaluated against normative theories of justice, therby contributing to the analysisof justice in global economic governance. Our conjectures build on the application of basic economic theory to what we consider characteristic, specific features of the digital economy.

The disruptions to the earth’s system have reached an unprecedented scale, posing enormous challenges around the globe. The world has entered the Anthropocene, a new geological age in which human activity is recognised as the dominant force driving the negative changes in climate and environment, and the very earth system upon which our existence depends. In such an era of planet-wide transformation, some scholars have argued for a new model for planet-wide environmental politics: earth system governance (Biermann, 2007). Earth system governance is broader than traditional environmental policy and emphasises the complexities of integrated socio-ecological systems (for a focus on natual resources see Armstrong, Chapter 21 in this volume). Key concerns of earth system governance are broad and often include interdependent challenges such as land use change, food system disruptions, climate change, environment-induced migration, species extinction and air pollution.[...]. This chapter expands with three main goals: first, we discuss how the global economic system affects the allocation of environmental benefits and burdens among people and countries around the world. Second, we analyse varying approaches to earth system governance and their distinctive proposals for an effective and just earth system governance. We conclude by laying out our policy proposals for earch system governance in this field, focusin on redistribution in a pro-poor manner.

 

 

 

The disruptions to the earth’s system have reached an unprecedented scale, posing enormous challenges around the globe. The world has entered the Anthropocene, a new geological age in which human activity is recognised as the dominant force driving the negative changes in climate and environment, and the very earth system upon which our existence depends. In such an era of planet-wide transformation, some scholars have argued for a new model for planet-wide environmental politics: earth system governance (Biermann, 2007). Earth system governance is broader than traditional environmental policy and emphasises the complexities of integrated socio-ecological systems (for a focus on natual resources see Armstrong, Chapter 21 in this volume). Key concerns of earth system governance are broad and often include interdependent challenges such as land use change, food system disruptions, climate change, environment-induced migration, species extinction and air pollution.[...]. This chapter expands with three main goals: first, we discuss how the global economic system affects the allocation of environmental benefits and burdens among people and countries around the world. Second, we analyse varying approaches to earth system governance and their distinctive proposals for an effective and just earth system governance. We conclude by laying out our policy proposals for earch system governance in this field, focusin on redistribution in a pro-poor manner.

 

 

 

The disruptions to the earth’s system have reached an unprecedented scale, posing enormous challenges around the globe. The world has entered the Anthropocene, a new geological age in which human activity is recognised as the dominant force driving the negative changes in climate and environment, and the very earth system upon which our existence depends. In such an era of planet-wide transformation, some scholars have argued for a new model for planet-wide environmental politics: earth system governance (Biermann, 2007). Earth system governance is broader than traditional environmental policy and emphasises the complexities of integrated socio-ecological systems (for a focus on natual resources see Armstrong, Chapter 21 in this volume). Key concerns of earth system governance are broad and often include interdependent challenges such as land use change, food system disruptions, climate change, environment-induced migration, species extinction and air pollution.[...]. This chapter expands with three main goals: first, we discuss how the global economic system affects the allocation of environmental benefits and burdens among people and countries around the world. Second, we analyse varying approaches to earth system governance and their distinctive proposals for an effective and just earth system governance. We conclude by laying out our policy proposals for earch system governance in this field, focusin on redistribution in a pro-poor manner.

 

 

 

By now, inequality has assumed centre stage in many international debates. For example, whilst the headline focus of the MDGs until 2015 was on halving extreme poverty, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development added an SDG on inequality reduction. This shift in policy focus has implications for global governance. This chapter discusses key measures and trends of global inequality, investigates the importance of inequality for other important aspects of the global economy, and sketches some of the implications for global governance. For space limitations, we focus on global income inequality. [...].This chapter discusses inequality measures and trends in income inequality and wealth. It also distinguishes national and global inequalilty. The chapter covers income and wealth and their respective trends before sketching out key implications for global governance.

By now, inequality has assumed centre stage in many international debates. For example, whilst the headline focus of the MDGs until 2015 was on halving extreme poverty, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development added an SDG on inequality reduction. This shift in policy focus has implications for global governance. This chapter discusses key measures and trends of global inequality, investigates the importance of inequality for other important aspects of the global economy, and sketches some of the implications for global governance. For space limitations, we focus on global income inequality. [...].This chapter discusses inequality measures and trends in income inequality and wealth. It also distinguishes national and global inequalilty. The chapter covers income and wealth and their respective trends before sketching out key implications for global governance.

By now, inequality has assumed centre stage in many international debates. For example, whilst the headline focus of the MDGs until 2015 was on halving extreme poverty, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development added an SDG on inequality reduction. This shift in policy focus has implications for global governance. This chapter discusses key measures and trends of global inequality, investigates the importance of inequality for other important aspects of the global economy, and sketches some of the implications for global governance. For space limitations, we focus on global income inequality. [...].This chapter discusses inequality measures and trends in income inequality and wealth. It also distinguishes national and global inequalilty. The chapter covers income and wealth and their respective trends before sketching out key implications for global governance.

The lesson of SEMICON 2025 is clear: no single country can control every layer of the semiconductor value chain.

De Jean Jaurès à Aristide Briand, de Lénine à Clara Zetkin, lorsqu'une guerre éclatait en Europe et menaçait de l'ensevelir, tribuns de gauche et manifestants pacifistes donnaient de la voix. Rien de tel dans le cas de l'Ukraine. Alors que le conflit s'envenime et que les médias s'enflamment, la (...) / Russie, Ukraine, Armée, Conflit, Géopolitique, Parti politique, Politique, Relations internationales, Relations Est-Ouest, Diplomatie, Stratégie militaire - 2022/11

Seoul is well-positioned to leverage its newly-gained status as a “force multiplier,” capable of shaping the geopolitical calculations of the U.S. and China.  

PRAGUE, 12 September 2025 — Over 200 participants—including representatives from OSCE participating States, Partners for Co-operation, OSCE structures, civil society, international organizations, and subject-matter experts—gathered in Prague for the Chairpersonship Forum, “Building a Resilient Future in a Changing Climate”, held on 11 and 12 September.

Organized under Finland’s 2025 OSCE Chairpersonship, in co-operation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, the Office of the Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities, and the OSCE Documentation Centre in Prague, the Forum addressed forward-looking ways for participating States to strengthen their resilience and responses to security challenges stemming from climate change.

“As conflicts and wars take center-stage, climate-related risks and environmental degradation are in danger of fading into the background. Russia’s war in Ukraine has placed climate and environmental co-operation in a new and challenging light,” said Elina Valtonen, OSCE Chairperson-in-Office and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Finland. “The OSCE is a particularly suitable forum for discussing the links between climate and security, thanks to its comprehensive security approach, mandate supporting broad dialogue, and framework that allows these connections to be explored holistically.”

The Forum featured a high-level opening with welcoming remarks by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Jan Lipavský, OSCE Chairperson-in-Office and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Finland Elina Valtonen, OSCE Secretary General Feridun H. Sinirlioğlu, Ukraine’s Deputy Minister of Economy Pavlo Kartashov, and Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities Bakyt Dzhusupov.

Four key thematic sessions focused on investments in climate resilience through a whole-of-society approach, climate action driven by cross-sectoral co-operation, the role of climate data and innovation in the age of information security, and the inclusion and agency of youth in climate security.

A research study commissioned by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, “Strengthening the OSCE’s Climate and Security Agenda”, was also presented at the Forum, and a subsequent panel discussion assessed advancing the role of the OSCE in climate change and security.

The Forum reaffirmed that a resilient future in a changing climate is not merely a policy option, but an urgent imperative for sustainable development and regional stability.

Des mudstones inhabituels trouvés sur la planète rouge pourraient être associés à d'anciens microbes martiens.

While France claims to have been the target of foreign meddling after pigs' heads were found in front of nine [...]

Au Burkina Faso, Dr Yaméogo offre aux plus jeunes un accès à des soins oculaires spécialisés. Dans un contexte où les ophtalmologistes sont rares et les équipements limités, elle incarne l’espoir pour des milliers de familles.

The franchise's success reflects the growing size – and evolving nature – of Japan’s anime industry in recent years.

597393

Open data offers timely insights into markets, competitors, and consumers, serving as a key enabler of evidence-based decision-making, financial innovation, and sustainable growth. To promote its use across Ukraine’s business and financial sectors, the Office of the Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities (OCEEA) conducted a specialized training course titled “Open Data for business and the financial sector” on 11 and 12 September in Kyiv.

The training course was organized jointly with the Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine and Texty.org.ua, an independent analytical media organization, in partnership with the National Bank of Ukraine, the Association of Ukrainian Banks, and the Office for Entrepreneurship and Export Development.

Forty-five financial and banking analysts, business professionals, and due diligence experts gained practical skills and tailored insights into using open data for research, analysis, and visualization. Topics ranged from market research and analysis to process automation and the development of open data-based start-ups and banking automation solutions.

"Open data is a source of new opportunities for banks and businesses,” said Yanina Liubyva, Head of the Open Data Expert Group of the Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine. “It not only enables a better understanding of customers and the market, but also helps create innovative services, optimize processes, and build trust. Learning how to use open data effectively is a step toward leadership in a competitive environment."

Particularly for banks and financial institutions, open data is increasingly essential for verifying partners’ reliability, assessing creditworthiness, reducing risks, and forecasting trend all of which contribute to competitiveness, innovation, and long-term growth. Through practical exercises, case studies, and success stories, participants were shown how open data can directly strengthen business operations and strategic planning.

"When businesses and financial actors gain the capacity to work effectively with open data, they are better equipped to anticipate risks, seize opportunities, and foster innovation," said Olena Dobrunik, Assistant Project Officer at OCEEA. "Through this training course, the OSCE reaffirms its commitment to helping stakeholders turn data into actionable knowledge, supporting sustainable growth, accountability, and long-term economic stability."

The training was part of the OSCE-wide extrabudgetary project Promoting Good Governance and a Positive Business Climate in the OSCE Region through Digitalization and the Use of Open Data, funded by the United States with additional support from Poland and Norway.