In the challenging landscape of global unemployment, the story of Youmna, a 30-year-old Egyptian woman, stands as a poignant example. A decade of dedication to her organization abruptly ended due to the pandemic, plunging her into a three-year job search. This narrative, compounded by a lack of early educational opportunities, resonates as a common experience in the Arab world.
At its core, Youmna’s story grapples with unemployment, a conflict explored through its definition and the consequences it imposes on individuals, societies, and economies. Her personal struggles, marked by stress-related health issues, mirror the toll exacted on individuals. Societal repercussions manifest in limited opportunities, substandard living conditions, and underfunded institutions.
Global unemployment rates expose a stark reality, with the Arab region leading at 11.26%, underscoring the urgency of addressing the issue. The intricate relationship between education and unemployment becomes apparent, with studies confirming that higher education levels correlate with lower unemployment risks. A comparative graph illustrates Brazil’s struggle with basic and intermediate education versus Japan’s success with advanced education.
A potential solution emerges: investing more in education to elevate citizens’ skills and foster innovation. Aligned with Sustainable Development Goal 4, advocating for quality education becomes imperative. The graph depicting average education expenditure across countries emphasizes that nations with lower unemployment rates allocate more resources to education. The recommendation is clear: countries should prioritize and increase spending on their education systems, creating a pathway to innovation, economic growth, and enhanced employment opportunities.
Youmna’s narrative encapsulates the broader struggle against unemployment. The call to action is unmistakable: invest in education to reshape the narrative, empower individuals, and build resilient, thriving communities. In the transformative power of education lies the resolution to Youmna’s journey, a beacon of hope in the face of adversity.
In 2007, the world experienced a financial shockwave that originated from the U.S. housing market downturn. The crisis quickly rippled across global economies, with significant impacts felt in the U.S., U.K., and China. In this post, we’ll explore a comprehensive analysis of the crisis and the concerted policy responses that helped navigate these turbulent economic waters. Accompanied by insightful Tableau visualizations, we delve into the monetary and fiscal adjustments that shaped the path to recovery.
The Epicenter of the Crisis:
The 2007 financial crisis is a stark reminder of the interconnectedness of global markets. Starting in the U.S., the collapse of the housing bubble sent shockwaves that were felt in the U.K., a major financial hub, and China, the burgeoning economic powerhouse. The crisis highlighted vulnerabilities and sparked a global debate on economic safeguards. Our Tableau visualizations, which I’ll share throughout this post, bring to life the data behind these seismic economic shifts.
Economic Indicators in Turmoil:
GDP Growth Rate: The severe downturn in the U.S. and UK economies in 2009, with GDP growth plummeting to -2.60% and -4.51%, respectively, signified deep recessions. China’s maintenance of a 9.40% growth rate, despite a global slowdown, demonstrated the effectiveness of its economic policies and a less interconnected reliance on global financial systems.
Unemployment: The dramatic rise in U.S. unemployment to 9.25% in 2009 mirrored the harsh reality of the economic crisis’s impact on the labor market. The UK’s unemployment rate’s more moderate increase to 7.54% indicated a resilient but strained job market. China’s steady unemployment rate suggested a controlled labor environment, possibly cushioned by government-led initiatives.
Inflation and Deflation: The pivot to deflation in the U.S. and China in 2009 highlighted the breadth of the economic contraction, marked by plummeting consumer demand. The UK’s decreasing inflation rate, from its 2008 peak, nonetheless remained positive, reflecting persistent cost pressures despite a contracting economy.
Investor Sentiment and Market Response:
FDI: The UK’s steep decline in FDI following the crisis suggested capital flight and a significant erosion of economic confidence, a contrast to the U.S.’s more stable investment climate. China’s gradual FDI decline mirrored the broader cautious stance of global investors during the period of uncertainty.
Equity Markets: The UK and U.S. equity markets’ deep dives of -49.5% and -38.5% in 2008, along with China’s -52.7% plunge, captured the panic and rapid revaluation of future earnings potential, significantly affecting wealth and spending.
Monetary & Fiscal Adjustments: Navigating Through Economic Turbulence
The global financial crisis of 2007-2008 forced countries to reevaluate their monetary and fiscal strategies. Central banks across the world slashed interest rates, while governments ramped up borrowing to inject liquidity and stimulate economic activity. The graphs provided offer a glimpse into how China, the United Kingdom, and the United States adjusted their policies in the face of economic headwinds.
Monetary Policy Adjustments: A Dive into Negative Real Interest Rates
In response to the financial crisis, China, the UK, and the US adopted aggressive monetary policies, including steering real interest rates into negative territory to encourage borrowing and investment. This is particularly evident in 2009’s negative real interest rates.
China responded to the crisis by lowering its real interest rates from -0.260 in 2007 to -2.306 in 2008, indicating a decisive move to encourage spending and investment.
The UK followed a similar path, with real interest rates dropping from 3.106 in 2007 to -1.241 in 2009, reflecting a substantial monetary stimulus.
The US saw its real interest rates decrease from 5.207% in 2007 to 2.592 in 2009, as part of its strategy to revive the economy.
Fiscal Stimulus: The Path of Increased Government Debt
The fiscal response to the crisis was marked by an increase in government debt, as seen in the upward trend of central government debt relative to GDP. This increase is indicative of a commitment to boost economic activity through government spending.
The UK’s central government debt rose sharply from 93.63% in 2007 to 130.69% in 2010, a clear sign of significant fiscal intervention.
The US also saw its government debt climb from 63.82% in 2007 to 84.96% in 2010, as it took on more debt to stabilize the economy.
For China, although not displayed on the graph, the World Bank and IMF data show an increase in central government debt from 16.4% in 2007 to 33.5% in 2010, demonstrating China’s use of fiscal policy to maintain economic momentum.
Analyzing the Impact of Policy Adjustments on Economic Indicators:
Following these adjustments, we look at how they influenced key economic indicators. The equity markets in all three countries showed signs of recovery in 2010, with China’s market increasing by 8.2%, the UK’s by 12.8%, and the US’s by 13.6%. Such improvements in the equity markets typically reflect greater investor confidence, potentially buoyed by lower interest rates making equities more attractive compared to fixed-income assets.
In terms of foreign direct investment (FDI), there was a noticeable uptick in all three countries. China’s FDI as a percentage of GDP went up by 55.9%, the UK’s by an impressive 345.2%, and the US’s by 57.7%. The growth in FDI highlights the global improvement in investor sentiment and market confidence, likely influenced by the monetary easing and fiscal stimulus measures.
As for GDP growth, all three countries experienced positive changes. China continued its robust growth; the UK and the US both rebounded from negative growth rates in 2009 to positive rates in 2010. These changes underscore the effectiveness of the stimulus efforts, which aimed to encourage borrowing, spending, and overall economic activity.
Findings and Recommendations:
The economic data from the 2007-2008 financial crisis reveal that while aggressive monetary easing and fiscal stimulus were critical in mitigating the downturn, the recovery trajectory varied significantly across nations. The U.S. and the UK, with deep contractions in GDP and spiking unemployment, required robust policy responses to revive consumer confidence and stabilize financial markets. On the other hand, China’s proactive fiscal measures, particularly in infrastructure, helped sustain its economic momentum. Our findings suggest that future crises may demand even more nuanced and sector-specific policy interventions. For instance, targeted support for small businesses and industries most affected by a downturn could provide a more efficient path to recovery. Additionally, policies aimed directly at consumers, such as mortgage relief programs, could prevent a cascade of defaults and stabilize the housing market more rapidly. A collaborative international response, leveraging the strengths of interdependent global economies, could amplify the efficacy of such measures. Therefore, we recommend a framework for economic policy that emphasizes flexibility, targeted support, and global coordination to not only cushion against immediate shocks but also to lay the groundwork for sustainable, long-term growth.
Conclusion: Steering Through Economic Adversity
The financial crisis that shook the foundations of global economies in 2007-2008 also brought to light the critical role of proactive monetary and fiscal policies in navigating economic adversity. The United States, the United Kingdom, and China each faced unique challenges and responded with tailored strategies that reflected their economic philosophies and priorities. Despite the varied approaches, the shared objective was clear: to stabilize the financial system, stimulate growth, and restore confidence. The recovery of equity markets, the resurgence of foreign direct investment, and the gradual uptick in GDP growth by 2010 are a testament to the effectiveness of these interventions. This period of economic recalibration provided valuable insights into the intricate dance between government policy and economic health, insights that continue to shape economic strategies in our increasingly interconnected world.
This does not start with a funny caption or a happy anecdote, but I assure you it’s an important topic and it touches the lives of everyone. This is Tarek Moukalled, and I hope that by the end of this session you can see the light at the end of the tunnel for patients in Lebanon.
Our story begins with rather an unfortunate observation. Patients in Lebanon are dying. As a matter of fact, the death rate has increased from 4.34 deaths in 2016 to 6.25 deaths in 2020 per 1,000 persons. That is drastic and an alarming increase of approximately 44 % during a span of 5 years. But why?
A close inspection of the healthcare expenditure per capita during the suggested years shows a considerable increase from 648 USD to 995 USD. Furthermore, the % expenditure of GDP on healthcare in Lebanon also shows a consistent trend of a little less than 8 % across the same years. So, things should be fine, if not better! Yet unfortunately, this is not the case.
It appears the Lebanese people have been taking things into their hands. With the economic recession and the subsequent governmental bankruptcy, GDP decreased from ~ 51.1 billion USD in 2016 to 31.7 billion USD in 2020. This led to the fact that the Lebanese people have been paying more and more from their own pockets for healthcare reaching a whopping 44.2 % of healthcare expenditure in 2020.
Comparing the above results with the healthcare sector of a different country that shares similar demographics and healthcare expenditure with Lebanon would help with the context and the subsequent validation of the proposed solution, the light at the end of the tunnel. Remember?
With a similar % expenditure of GDP on healthcare (~ 7.5 %) and a little lower starting point in death rate of 3.16 per 1,000 persons, Jordan’s death rate in 2020 reaches 3.47 per 1,000 persons. The healthcare expenditure per capita in Jordan is consistently way lower than that of Lebanon. The % of out-of-pocket expenditure on healthcare is also steady and lower than that of Lebanon. As to the GDP, it starts lower than Lebanon in 2016 at ~ 39.9 billion USD and ends higher than Lebanon at 43.6 billion USD. As such, the main considerable deviation between both countries is the GDP amount. For that matter, it’s important to note that economies and healthcare sectors grow through expenditure rather than stagnation or restriction.
The increase in the share of health expenditure as part of GDP will have positive results on both short-term and long-term.
Enhanced Healthcare Quality
Faster Healthcare Response
Improved Patient Health Outcome
Decreased Death Rate
Target for Healthcare Tourism
With that, it is imperative to urge whoever who is responsible to proceed with the increase in healthcare expenditure for the sake of our patients and our future.
In a world where economic resilience is more crucial than ever, Lebanon stands as a testament to the enduring spirit of overcoming adversity. This blog post is a reflection and expansion of those insights, exploring how we can collectively work towards a more robust economy.
The Prelude: Reflecting on Lebanon’s Past Economic Successes
Our journey begins with a look back at Lebanon’s economic landscape, particularly around 2007 and 2008. During these years, Lebanon witnessed a remarkable phase of economic growth, thanks in large part to the collaborative efforts of the government, the central bank, and, crucially, the citizens. This era serves as a beacon of hope and a blueprint for what can be achieved through collective action and strategic economic planning.
The Current Scenario: Understanding the Crisis
Fast forward to the present, and the picture is starkly different. Lebanon faces significant economic challenges, marked by a steep decline in GDP growth, particularly post-2018. The data paints a troubling picture: negative growth rates and a plunging gross domestic savings rate. These indicators are more than mere numbers; they are a reflection of a nation grappling with economic instability.
The Interplay of GDP and Savings: A Dual Focus
A key focus of our analysis is the interplay between GDP growth and savings. A thriving economy typically boosts savings, but the reverse is also true: economic downturns lead to decreased savings due to increased expenditures or borrowing. Lebanon’s current situation, characterized by a combined decline in GDP growth and savings, signals a need for urgent, targeted economic interventions.
Tackling the Crisis: Recommendations for Economic Improvement
The core of our discussion revolves around actionable recommendations to improve Lebanon’s economy. Drawing from past successes and current challenges, these recommendations include:
Fostering Government and Central Bank Collaboration: Just as in the past, strong cooperation between these entities is vital for implementing effective economic policies.
Empowering Citizens: Encouraging entrepreneurship, supporting local businesses, and fostering a culture of economic literacy can help citizens contribute more effectively to the nation’s economy.
Strategic Economic Planning: This involves revisiting fiscal policies, exploring new avenues for economic diversification, and investing in sectors that can drive sustainable growth.
Conclusion: A Call to Action
As we stand at this critical juncture in Lebanon’s economic history, it’s imperative that we learn from our past, understand our present, and actively work towards a better future. The journey ahead is fraught with challenges, but also filled with opportunities for growth and resilience. It’s a journey that requires the collective effort of every Lebanese citizen, policy-maker, and stakeholder. Together, we can steer Lebanon towards a path of economic recovery and prosperity.
Over the past three decades, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been a central focus of global environmental discussions. The issue of increasing CO2 emissions, largely attributed to human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and industrial processes, has gained heightened attention due to its significant implications for climate change.
The last 30 years have witnessed a steady rise in global CO2 emissions, driven by rapid industrialization, urbanization, and an escalating demand for energy. As nations grapple with the challenges of mitigating climate change, understanding the patterns and drivers of CO2 emissions over this period becomes crucial for formulating effective strategies to address and curb the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on our planet’s climate system.
The bar chart shows that Saudi Arabia is the most CO2 emitting country among the gulf countries. This is due to being an oil producing country, thus the rely on fossil fuel is massive.
As shown in the bar chart, the main energy source in Saudi Arabia is oil and natural gas with zero reliance on renewable sources.
The sector that is using the most energy is the electricity and heat with around 50% of total fuel consumption.
Reducing CO2 emissions in the electricity and heat sector involves implementing a combination of energy-efficient practices, transitioning to cleaner energy sources, and adopting sustainable technologies. Here are several strategies to achieve this:
1.Transition to Renewable Energy: Invest in and promote the use of renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, hydropower, and geothermal for electricity generation and heating.
2.Energy Efficiency Measures: Implement energy efficiency programs and technologies in power plants and heating systems to optimize energy use and reduce waste.
3.Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Systems: Implement CHP systems, also known as cogeneration, which simultaneously produce electricity and useful heat from the same energy source, improving overall efficiency.
4.Upgrade and Retrofit Power Plants: Upgrade existing power plants to more efficient and cleaner technologies. Consider retrofitting with advanced technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS) to capture and store CO2 emissions.
5.Smart Grids and Demand Response: Implement smart grids to optimize electricity distribution and incorporate demand response systems to manage energy consumption during peak times.
In the pursuit of a world marked by Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions (SDG 16), there exists a formidable challenge that casts a shadow on our collective journey: intentional homicides. As nations strive for equilibrium and progress, this rising tide of violence threatens to disrupt the delicate balance sought under SDG 16, unraveling the fabric of our communities and hindering the path to justice.
The Unsettled World
Intentional homicides not only claim lives but shatter communities, leaving a trail of grief and despair in their wake. The impact reverberates beyond the immediate loss, affecting the very foundations of sustainable development. As we stand at the intersection of a quest for global justice, intentional homicides emerge as a stark reminder of the work yet to be done.
A Sign of Change
The CPIA (Country Policy and Institutional Assessment) Public Sector Management and Institutions cluster average provides an assessment of a country’s public sector quality, including aspects of governance and institutional strength. While this assessment doesn’t directly address homicides, improvements in public sector management and institutions can have indirect effects on reducing crime and promoting stability.
Countries with higher CPIA Public Sector Management and Institutions cluster average scores are likely to have more effective governance, transparent institutions, and better public administration. Such improvements can contribute to a stable environment, potentially discouraging criminal activities, including homicides. Strengthened institutions often lead to better law enforcement, judicial systems, and crime prevention strategies, indirectly impacting public safety.
Bold Steps
It’s our turn to help in implementing SDG 16. Let’s start drawing the peaceful world we always dreamed of by:
Advocating for Policy Reforms: Encourage comprehensive policy reforms that prioritize enhancing public sector management for increased transparency and responsiveness.
Promoting Anti-Corruption Measures: Emphasize the importance of anti-corruption measures within public institutions to ensure integrity and accountability.
Investing in Judicial and Legal Reforms: Support initiatives aimed at improving judicial and legal systems for fair and efficient justice.
Empowering Local Communities: Foster community engagement in decision-making processes, empowering citizens to actively participate in governance.
Championing Transparency with Open Data: Advocate for transparency through open data initiatives, making government data accessible for public scrutiny.
Enhancing Education and Training: Invest in education and training programs for public servants to elevate their skills and knowledge.
Encouraging Collaboration: Promote collaboration between government, civil society, and the private sector to address shared governance challenges.
Raising Public Awareness: Launch public awareness campaigns to inform citizens about the importance of strong institutions in ensuring justice and maintaining peace.
