This document proposes a new institutional framework for the implementation of productive development policies (PDP) in Chiapas , with the objective of promoting a structural change in the Chiapas economy in search of greater diversity and productive complexity.
The first section contains a diagnosis of the current context of PDP in the State. A low degree of implementation and execution is observed , despite the abundance of analysis, prescriptions and initiatives to support private companies. This situation cannot be attributed to the scarcity of resources. Although there are not many resources available at the state level for PDPs, there are at the level of existing federal programs. These are coordination and leadership deficiencies in the public sector , which interact with coordination problems within the private sector itself , with the perception of political-institutional instability , and with a history of mistrust, to form a scenario of little collaboration at different levels, so that many of the existing opportunities are wasted.
The second section describes the conceptual foundations for a new institutional framework that enables the effective implementation of PDP, reflected in four basic principles . First, the new framework must be built with relatively few state budget resources . Second, it is emphasized that it should focus on the coordination between the public and private sectors , which requires specific skills and knowledge within the public sector, the building of a relationship of trust , and the proactive promotion of the organization and coordination of the private sector.. Third, an emphasis on the provision of public goods and services, and not market interventions. Fourth, the promotion of a dynamic iterative process.
Once the principles have been established, the third section details the specific coordination proposal for the implementation of the new institutional framework. She focuses on the following five points. First, the designation of an implementing body on which the leadership and responsibility for the PDP implementation process clearly falls. Second, it is recommended to provide said entity with a technically competent staff. Third, it must have political autonomy. Fourth, it must be proactive, in an action-oriented dynamic process. Lastly, you must foster leadership in the private sector. At the end, illustrative examples of how the practical implementation of this dynamic process could be given are discussed.
This paper examines the microeconomic determinants of residential real estate prices in Caracas, Venezuela, using a private database containing 17,526 transactions from 2008 to 2009. The particular institutional characteristics of many countries in Latin America, and Venezuela in particular, where land invasions and expropriations (with only partial compensation) have been common threats to property owners, provide us with an opportunity to test the effects of these risks on housing prices using a unique database. The effect of these risks on property prices is negative and significant. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to quantify these impacts in the Hedonic pricing literature applied to real estate. Size, the number of parking spaces, the age of the property, the incidence of crime, and the average income in the neighborhood are significant determinants of prices. Finally, this paper analyzes the microeconomic determinants of housing prices at the municipal level.
We examine in this paper the relation between government size and capital and labor openness employing a panel of the 32 Mexican states over the period 1996-2006. Making use of two alternative measures of capital and labor openness and employing several alternative econometric specifications, we first find systematic positive effects of our openness measures on the size of the states’ total government spending. Thereafter, we break down total government expenditure and focus on three subcategories of spending associated with social welfare: education, health and poverty alleviation programs. We find that FDI flows, our proxy for capital openness, are not significant determinants of the state’s social spending, but labor openness, in the form of international migration, has a significant and even greater impact on some of the aforementioned categories than on total spending.
China’s economic and social achievements since the beginning of reform and opening are unprecedented in global history. Managing the growth process in this continuously changing environment has required great skill and the use of unconventional economic policy. Now China has entered a new era in its development process with a set of challenges largely different from those of the recent past. Some problems - such as growing internal and external structural imbalances, increasing income and regional inequality – have arisen from, or been exacerbated by, the very pattern and success of high growth since reforms began. Others are newly posed by rapid changes in the global economy. These challenges can best be tackled in an integrated and coordinated fashion. This report, supported by the China Economic Research and Advisory Programme (CERAP), identifies the primary challenges facing China today and presents options for meeting them.