by I am doing some work on the way technology can be chosen to maximise employment in the pursuit of advancing general well-being. This is in the context of some work I am doing on advancing what is known as ‘relative pro-poor growth’ strategies in Africa via employment creation programs and draws on my earlier work in South Africa on the Expanded Public Works Program. In the current work, I have been assessing ways in which the Labour Intensive Public Works program in Ghana has been deployed to serve this purpose. The problem one confronts when working as a development economist in less well-off nations is that the institutional bias promoted by the IMF and the World Bank is towards advancing, at best, what we term ‘absolute pro-poor growth’. But that sort of agenda typically fails to
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: absolute pro-poor growth, development economics, distribution, expropriation, Ghana, IMF, Job Guarantee, relative pro-poor growth, World Bank
This could be interesting, too:
Michael Hudson writes Twice as Important
Dan Crawford writes The IMF’s Proposed Policies on the Management of Capital Flows
Matias Vernengo writes The IMF’s 2018 Stand-By Arrangement with Argentina: An Ultra Vires Act?
Michael Stephens writes Women’s Economic Empowerment and Control over Time in Sub-Saharan Africa (Nov 1-2)
I am doing some work on the way technology can be chosen to maximise employment in the pursuit of advancing general well-being. This is in the context of some work I am doing on advancing what is known as ‘relative pro-poor growth’ strategies in Africa via employment creation programs and draws on my earlier work in South Africa on the Expanded Public Works Program. In the current work, I have been assessing ways in which the Labour Intensive Public Works program in Ghana has been deployed to serve this purpose. The problem one confronts when working as a development economist in less well-off nations is that the institutional bias promoted by the IMF and the World Bank is towards advancing, at best, what we term ‘absolute pro-poor growth’. But that sort of agenda typically fails to strengthen other aspects of a strong civil society because it is almost always accompanied by rising inequality which continues to concentrate power and influence at the top and leads to resources being disproportionately expropriated by the wealthy (and usually foreign) classes. Institutions such as democracy, justice, law and order and causes such as environmental sustainability are then compromised....Bill Mitchell – billy blog
Inclusive growth means poverty reduction and declining income inequality
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia
See also
Could this possibly be the result of natural spontaneous order resulting from market competition and personal initiative so that everyone receives their just deserts based on their productivity? Or is the result of asymmetry and bias? If the later how does that arise. Is it solely the result of government as some claim, or it is owing to the asymmetrical power that increasing wealth as ownership of real and financial assets conveys?
Michael Roberts Blog
The top 1% own 48% of all global personal wealth; 10% own 85%
Michael Roberts