So runs the by-line on Nouriel Roubini's concise analysis of the G-20 and world affairs in general, published today in Slate magazine. (Nouriel Roubini is chairman of Roubini Global Economics and Professor of Economics at New York University's Stern School of Business.) Some tasters from the beginning and the conclusion:
We live in a world where, in theory, global economic and political governance is in the hands of the G-20. In practice, however, there is no global leadership. And there is severe disarray and disagreement among G-20 members about monetary and fiscal policy, exchange rates and global imbalances, climate change, trade, financial stability, the international monetary system, and energy, food, and global security. Indeed, the major powers now see these issues as zero-sum games rather than positive-sum games. Ours is, in essence, a G-Zero world. ....
.... for the first time since the end of World War II, there is no nation—or strong alliance of nations—with the political will and economic leverage to secure its goals on the global stage. As in previous historical periods, this vacuum may favor the ambitious and the aggressive as they seek their own advantage. In such a world, the absence of a high-level agreement on creating a new collective-security system—focused on economics rather than military power—is not merely irresponsible, but dangerous. A G-Zero world without leadership and multilateral cooperation is an unstable equilibrium for global economic prosperity and security.It's definitely worth reading the whole piece. Do it. Now.
'The US president's chief science adviser says the nation's current efforts to tackle climate change are insufficient in the long-term.'
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12508050
This therefore suggests that the only superpower in the world, the USA ('the world's policeman'), does not have a sufficient climate change policy. This may also hinder the chance of developing countries, such as China or India, from having a specific climate change policy. They may use the US chief science adviser's revelations against the world and continue pumping out carbon emissions, which is key to their development and may claim that developed countries such as the US and UK did not have to have concern for the environment whilst going through their Industrial Revolutions and so it is only fair that they do not. The article also involves a short interview with Professor John Holdren, Obama's chief science advisor.