Could an open source philosophy be the evolution of policy creation? Photo:Nan Palermo (Flickr)

Hey Germany, let’s have coffee. The simple act of sharing best policy practices could help resuscitate the global economy. So why aren’t we doing it?

The private sector commonly exchanges best practices to create more effective and efficient business models. The public sector could stand to learn a thing or two. Leaders and policymakers need to extend their hand across borders to learn from the success of countries beyond their trade routes.

For instance, the German labor market has not suffered nearly as much as the U.S. during the recession. Brookings Institute Fellow Elisabeth Jacobs provides an underlying reason: they take a long-term approach to labor policy by building (and budgeting) a sort of “what-if” scenario directly into their policy.

By weighing the cost of employee retention against layoffs, they opt to keep workers but trim hours. Once the local economy improves, they ramp up accordingly. Combined with short-term compensation, German companies can mitigate both salary and job loss. How might a similar model work in the United States, England, or Greece?

While not all policies could work seamlessly across hemispheres, many could lay the foundation for localized discussion. Once customized, implementation can begin. Think of it as open-source policy creation. Developing countries could benefit from such collaboration, with the reciprocal also true. Take innovations in Curitiba, Brazil. They created a recycling system that also addressed poverty by exchanging transit tickets for waste, serving as an incentive for citizens to clean up. Could a similar policy-driven incentive also work in urban centers in Sub-Saharan Africa or India?

The ideas are out there. We just need to find them. Instead of traditional foreign policy ambassadors that focus on trade, resources or aid, why not have an official collaborator that seeks to learn, share, and then implement best policy practices?

After all, what good is knowledge if you don’t do anything with it?

Critics say developed countries have broken promises for international aid. Photo: UK Department for International Development (flickr)

With cause for concern about the future of international aid amid the financial crisis faced by rich countries, some developing nations find microfinance playing an increasing role in fueling local growth.

At last week's 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan, South Korea, powerful advocates including U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon pressed for continued financial assistance from rich countries and better transparency for aid programs, according to the Washington Post.

But is "continued assistance" enough? Is it the kind of assistance that will lead to actual change? The European head of Oxfam International says the EU failed to take a leadership role at the summit, despite previous promises of aid allocation. Natalia Alonso says “donors are not on track to meet the Millennium Development Goals. In 2000, all rich countries recommitted to spend 0.7 percent of their national income as overseas aid by 2015, but a number of EU governments, such as Italy and Germany, are pretty far from this.” Oxfam found that amid the economic crisis, EU overall aid last year was just 0.43 percent of income, leaving a $65 billion shortfall to 56 poor countries.

It may signal more trouble for traditional international aid, the flow of cash or food aid transfers from richer to poorer countries. The economic crisis and criticisms of the summit leave the trajectory of aid in question.

As the world's wealth shifts to developing nations, some Western leaders want to be sure their aid is paying off. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair wrote in a Washington Post opinion piece that “leaders of emerging economies must ensure that they are able to attract high-quality, sustainable investment.”

World Bank president Robert B. Zoellick also points to this shifting paradigm, stating that “the time has come to envision a world “beyond aid” – a world where the shift is from the paradigm of charity to one of mutual economic benefit.”

One way in which some developing countries are expanding local markets in the era of questionable international aid is through successful microfinance programs. While the long-term solvency of some forms of microfinance are in question, other examples point to successes engineered by both developing countries’ governments and private local banks.

Government funded cash-transfer programs in Mexico and Brazil have been recognized as quite effective at reducing poverty and spurring local market growth, The New York Times reports. These programs provide small infusions of capital to low-income residents for both entrepreneurial and cost-of-living expenses, feeding local economies. Indonesia’s state-owned Bank Rakyat has successfully demonstrated similar results in recent years through a mixed savings-credit model, according to Elisabeth Rhyne in her article, “Five countries where microfinance works,” for China Daily.

Rhyne also highlights Bolivia’s BancoSol, a for-profit bank dedicated to serving the poor that operates within a strict regulatory framework. Competition among similarly modeled microfinance banks has spurred growth with low interest rates in Bolivia. Cambodia and Mongolia are two countries where replication of the Bolivia model has allowed microfinance banks to be “market leaders and innovators,” according to Rhyne.

In Columbia, where 96 percent of businesses are small, demand for microfinance has grown fast in the years of the global financial crisis, according to IPS news. Microfinance in Columbia “grew at a steady rate of 15 percent between 2007 and 2010," states a Visión Económica study. Small companies fuel demand for microfinance because "they generally do not meet the requirements set by commercial banks,” Jorge Varón, the manager of the development credit fund of the Colombians Supporting Colombians (CAC) programme, told IPS. And in a country with so many small businesses fueling market growth, this is a divergent route from typical aid pathways.

The financial crisis hasn't killed international aid. But it has people talking about what's next. Microfinance looks like a big part of the answer.

Erik Mandell is a graduate of Middlebury College in Vermont. He is currently pursuing a master's degree in public administration and global leadership at Portland State. Read his other contributions to Global Envision.

The European Central Bank looms large over the Euro debt crisis. Photo: soumit (flickr)

As Europe attempts to thwart a broader global recession, it is facing what many economists refer to as a trilemma, and poorer countries could be the victims.

A financial trilemma is comprised of three goals that policy makers try to achieve: (1) a stable/fixed exchange rate; (2) an economy open to international flows of capital; and (3) a sound monetary policy to stabilize the economy.

Here's the catch: In reality you can only achieve two of these goals, not all three.

In 1999, the Eurozone decided to give up the third goal, independent monetary policy. In exchange, they enjoy a common currency across 17 member nations and the freedom to exchange money and goods across borders. Though the European Central Bank creates monetary and fiscal policy for the European Union, each member nation relinquishes its own control.

This becomes an issue when a country gets into financial trouble and must defer to the European Central Bank or greater European Union. This was recently evidenced with the bailout and continuing debt problems in Greece.

Potential for problems arise due to our ever globalized, interconnected world. Eurozone policies are far-reaching, extending their grasp to neighboring emerging markets dependent on foreign dollars. With austerity measures becoming the norm, lenders are avoiding risk and could cut foreign lending in favor of keeping business in their own backyard. The Economist references a speech by the Financial Stability Board head, Mark Carney, in which he warned about the damage if the European bank were to deleverage on the world economy.

Many emerging economies in Eastern Europe depend on both foreign aid and outside investment. If the Eurozone's financial well runs dry the effect will ripple throughout Eastern Europe, even the U.S. Poorer E.U. members worry that they'll emerge the victims. French president Nicolas Sarkozy rocked the political world after his comments at a University of Strasbourg debate on November 8, where he described a proposal for a two-speed Europe, presumably divided between richer and poorer nations.

What part does the European Central Bank (ECB) play in this? That’s the question everyone is asking. Similar to the U.S. Federal Reserve, the ECB has the power and leverage to swoop in and bail out E.U. members on the brink of collapse. They are hesitating, however. Germany feels the ECB should step in only as a last resort. Many policymakers in Germany believe that the current crisis is forcing reform and thus serving a purpose, as recently expressed in The New York Times.

With optimism waning on debt solutions for the U.S. and abroad, tensions mount and consensus becomes imperative. Politics need to be set aside before any sort of real dialogue can exist. Will the E.U. decide on a two-speed Europe? Will any countries abandon the Euro? The implications for emerging markets are considerable; several outcomes could result in global recession.

Managing Director of the IMF Christine Lagarde meets China's Vice Premier Wang Qishan, Beijing, China. Photo: International Monetary Fund (flickr)

The global financial crisis has shaken up the international seating chart, and China may be vying for a better spot.

Though China was one of the International Monetary Fund’s original members, that invitation to the table didn’t mean it had a voice in the conversation. But last year, the World Bank and IMF both moved the country to third place. While the move changes the pecking order for Germany, the UK and France, traditional leaders, it matches China’s increasing position in the world economy with voting power.

Now, we wait to learn whether China will use its power to ease the Eurozone crisis. The IMF, typically the lender of last resort for sovereign states, needs more capital to provide the kind of liquidity Europe needs. China has that liquidity. In loaning to the IMF to play middleman, China can keep itself out of European politics, while keeping world economies - and important European trading partners - humming.

China’s funds would go far. Just last week, the New York Times reported, the IMF offered an additional short-term credit to “bystanders” - member nations feeling the “contagion" of regional and global default. One tool is a “precautionary and liquidity” credit line that would help countries approved by the Fund as having sound economic policies to meet short-term payments. The other new tool combines emergency disaster and post-conflict relief under a new rapid-financing instrument, which can now also be used after exogenous shocks like global financial crises.

The announcement immediately reversed earlier market slides the same day, showing the move boosted investor confidence, according to the Times. But if even a few countries take up the IMF on its offer, its account will soon run dry.

If that happens, China and its ocean of cash will be waiting. The country has shown signs that it’s at least willing to play, but it remains to be seen what rules it will follow. With Western economies looking increasingly desperate, China has the opportunity to play tough. Its decision could relieve the global economy, but it could also help put a new country at the head of the table.

Some say a transaction tax could put humans back in charge of financial markets. Photo: RoGb77 (flickr)

As lightning-fast computer programs replace human brokers on Europe's virtual trading floors, anti-poverty warriors want to slow things down.

There's never been a better time, they say, for a redistributive "Robin Hood tax," which would slap a fee on each financial transaction, deterring meaningless trades and putting the revenue toward fighting poverty and climate change. The center-right leaders of France and Germany called for such a tax last month, Reuters reported, and leftish outlets like The Guardian have happily joined their choir: "Even if such a tax was levied at just 0.05%, it could raise hundreds of billions of dollars, which could be ploughed into development projects," the paper wrote of a petition signed by 1,000 economists from around the world. The EU plans to gather support for a tax at November's G-20 summit, says Reuters.

Political attacks on money-changers are nearly as old as money itself. What's new is that the usual arguments against such a tax – that it'd reduce trading volume and hurt the economy by making financial markets more volatile – may be getting weaker. In fact, people like former London Stock Exchange executive Martin Wheatley now argue that computer-driven trades make volatility worse.

Exhibit A: Wall Street's May 2010 "flash crash," in which computer algorithms temporarily wiped 10 percent off major stock indexes in a squall of rapid transactions, apparently because they saw one another doing the same thing.

On the Robin Hood Tax website, spokesman Richard Gower called this "casino capitalism cyborg-style" and suggested that humans could tax irrational computer programs out of the market.

Others use less colorful language.

"For the first time in financial history, machines can execute trades far faster than humans can intervene," Bank of England executive Andy Haldane said in July, according to The Telegraph. "Grit in the wheels, like grit on the roads, could help forestall the next crash."

Haldane was speaking in favor of internal or regulatory changes, not a redistributive "Robin Hood" tax. But with Western economies in a skid, some think financial markets might be safer with Robin behind the wheel. After all, at least he's human.

The G-20 is meeting this week in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Chaired by President Barack Obama, the purpose of the summit is to, “review the progress made since the Washington and London Summits and discuss further actions to assure a sound and sustainable recovery from the global financial and economic crisis.” I’ve heard of the G-8, but the G-20? I began to wonder about this alphanumeric soup of organizations. Who are they and what are they concerned with? The following scorecard should help interested followers of this subject keep track of the major players.

The G-6: Organized in 1975 by the finance ministers of Germany and France who were frustrated with the formality and structure of larger international meetings, the G-6 and subsequent evolutions of this body are strictly informal bodies that meet to discuss economic issues of mutual interest. After the creation of the G-8, the term G-6 is now used to refer to the six most populous members of the European Union. The member countries are: the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Japan

The G-7: Formed in 1976, this is an informal forum for the finance members of seven big industrial economies to discuss economic issues and seek agreement. Member countries include: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, United States. Now also includes the European Union.

The G-8: An evolution of the G-7, membership grew to include Russia. The European Union is a limited member; it cannot host a meeting or hold the presidency of the body. Members are: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, United States, Russia. European Union (limited member)

The G-8 plus Five: Recognizing the growing influence of other countries, the original group sometimes broadens their meetings by including the Outreach Five. As with all meetings, other countries are sometimes invited to attend. Members: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, United States, Russia. European Union (limited member) Plus: Brazil, China, India, Mexico, South Africa.

The G-20: According to their website, “[t]he G-20 was created as a response both to the financial crises of the late 1990s and a growing recognition that key emerging-market countries were not adequately included in the core of global economic discussion and governance.” Where the earlier groups (G-6 through G-8) were organized around the industrialized countries of the world, the G-20 begins to bring emerging economies into the dialog. Their first meeting was in Berlin, Germany. The Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the President of the World Bank, plus the chairs of the International Monetary and Financial Committee and Development Committee of the IMF and World Bank, also participate in G-20 meetings on an ex-officio basis.

The G-20 is made up of the finance ministers and central bank governors of 19 countries: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, European Central Bank

The G-33: The name for a group of developing countries that coordinates on trade and economic issues. It was created in order to help group countries which were all facing similar problems and give a unified voice to countries that were traditionally excluded from discussions among the industrialized countries. Members: Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Botswana, China, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Grenada, Guyana, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Laos, Mauritius, Madagascar, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, St Kitts & Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent & the Grenadines, Senegal, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tanzania, Trinidad & Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

There are other groups variously labeled as G-8, G-20, G-33, and even N-11 (countries which Goldman Sachs considered in 2005 to have a high potential of becoming the world’s largest economies this century: Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Turkey and Vietnam).

One of the best, reliable, sources of information about these groups and their members may be found on the websites of the World Trade Organization and the previously mentioned G-20.

You can Track the ongoing discussions of the Pittsburgh G-20 Summit here. But be prepared for slow page loading. It is a very busy website.

Popular vacation destinations are ready to give tourists what they're looking for, all that's missing now are the tourists themselves. Photo: Marvin (PA) (flickr)

Ah, summer. A time of rest, relaxation, meticulously planned vacations ... and this year, less travel.

One June report by a UN body predicted tourism would decline by 4 to 6 percent this year — and that's before the H1N1 virus further dampened travel.

Tourism is down even in the U.S., where tourists spent more money than anywhere else in 2008. But the downturn is worse across the Atlantic, according to an August Reuters story.

On Spain's popular Costa del Sol, tourist traffic is "the worst I have ever seen it," drink seller Pedro Hervas tells The Telegraph. "There is no one on the beach. If you came here last year at this time you would not be able to get around, there would be so many cars and people."

Analysts cited in a Wall Street Journal story on the battered Mediterranean tourism industry conclude that nations have yet to see the real effects of the tourism slump on economic growth.

"We are seeing a multifaceted impact from the crisis on the tourism sector and there will be a variety of consequences," Marko Mrsnik told the Journal. "These include employment consequences, consequences on the creditworthiness of households and companies in the sector and their ability to pay their debts, and it will certainly have an impact on government revenues."

In Greece about 19,000 jobs have been lost, people in the industry told The Wall Street Journal, and economists predict the lack of tourism could cut more than a percentage point off economic growth this year. According to the same Journal article, in Italy private-sector estimates of tourism-related job losses are as high as 150,000.

Some sunlight, however, has seeped through the dreary forecasts. After Iceland's economic meltdown made their currency more affordable, tourism spiked, and has continued to grow through the summer. North African countries such as Morocco and Algeria have also welcomed more visitors. Some of them are undoubtedly vacationing on the other side of the Mediterranean Sea for a change — or rather, to save some change.

These squares represent how much land would be needed to power the world, Europe or Germany with solar-thermal power. Photo: Treehugger

A single solar farm in the Sahara desert could provide clean electricity for all of Europe.

Scientists are investigating solar farms in the Sahara, as part of a $62 billion plan to provide all green power for a new, carbon-neutral European super-grid.

Because the sunlight in northern Africa is more intense, solar panels in the Sahara can capture up to three times more energy then panels located in northern Europe.

Arnulf Jaeger-Walden of the European commission’s Institute for Energy said today at the Euroscience Open Forum in Barcelona that a mere 0.3 percent of the light falling on the Sahara and Middle Eastern deserts would supply all the energy Europe needed.

The proposed solar farms will utilize advanced solar technology created by the California-based firm Ausra. These solar power plants use movable reflectors to concentrate sun light on pipes. The water in these pipes is solar-heated to produce high-pressure steam, which then goes through a turbine to generate electricity.

These innovative solar plants store enough hot water to make electricity even at night, and to increase production during peak demand periods. The plants are much more effective than traditional solar panel designs, allowing the plants to generate electricity at a mere 10 cents per kilowatt hour, much less than what the average consumer is paying now.

Ausra’s technology has been made cost-efficient by advances in transportation. Jaeger-Walden explained today that transporting the solar electricity would be relatively easy using new high-voltage direct current transmission (DC) lines instead of the alternating lines currently used. Energy loss using DC lines is very low, making the usual issue of transportation over long distances less of a problem.

Sixty-two million dollars for a project of this kind seems expensive — until you compare it with the more than $45 trillion in green-energy systems the world needs over the next 30 years to avoid global catastrophe, according to the International Energy Agency.

Doug Parr, Greenpeace UK's chief scientist, welcomed the project, saying:

"A large scale renewable energy grid is just the kind of innovation we need if we're going to beat climate change. Europe needs to become a zero-carbon society as soon as possible, and that will only happen with bold new ideas like this one. Tinkering with 20th-century technologies like coal and nuclear simply isn't going to get us there."

Global warming gives knowing weather patterns new economic impacts. Photo: Stefan Gara (flickr)

No global temperature change for ten years sounds too good to be true.

A new study by German researchers suggests that natural climate cycles will limit temperature increases for the next decade. But don’t forget about global warming yet.

The researchers base these predictions on a computer model they developed after the natural cycle of ocean temperatures called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). The AMO is closely linked to currents bringing tropical heat north, and appears to occur every 60 to 70 years.

But researcher Noel Keenlyside expects manmade global warming to raise temperatures to the upper limits of this natural cycle.

The research report emphasized that even if the researchers' model proves correct, the report does not mean global warming and the drastic higher temperatures projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and many other institutions are wrong. After about 15 years, the group expects temperatures to once again rise significantly.

And it's not all about temperature. Another benefit of this new understanding of the AMO is the ability to better predict weather patterns controlled by the currents.

The researchers themselves say that the value of their research is predicting temperature and precipitation for the next ten years with certainty. The economic impact of this information will likely be significant, aiding crop planning, storm preparation, and emergency responses.

This news may help governments to stay on track reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as well as protect citizens from weather catastrophes.

In Japan, her overnight hospital stay would only cost her $10. Photo: Hamed Saber (flickr)

“Every 30 seconds in the United States someone files for bankruptcy in the aftermath of a serious health problem,” according to the National Coalition on Health Care.

The United States spends the most in the world on health care – about $2 trillion annually. Yet, the U.S. ranks 37th in world in terms of the quality and fairness of its health care, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

The U.S. has no comprehensive national health insurance system. Those who have insurance get it through their employers, government programs, or private suppliers. However,there are 47 million people that are not insured. Furthermore, millions more are underinsured, which has led to a growing epidemic of medical debt and bankruptcy in the United States. A Harvard University report found that about 50 percent of all bankruptcy fillings were partially due medical debt.

In light of this growing problem, correspondent T.R. Reid traveled with Frontline to investigate if other free-market countries were having the same problems with medical-related bankruptcy. What he found was shocking.

Traveling to the United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, Taiwan, and Switzerland, Reid found that health-related bankruptcy is almost unheard of in these countries. Unlike the United States, all five of the visited countries have universal health care and pay a lot less.

Switzerland spends the second-highest amount on health care, but the government still spends 44-percent less per capita than the United States.

The full program, "Sick Around the World," is available online, along with a list of resources and a Q&A with Reid.

All the countries have varying degrees of private, market-based health care, like the United States. They, however, also limit the level of freedom the health care market can have. According to Frontline:

First, insurance companies must accept everyone and can't make a profit on basic care. Second, everybody's mandated to buy insurance, and the government pays the premium for the poor. Third, doctors and hospitals have to accept one standard set of fixed prices.

It's unnecessary for health care costs to send hundreds of thousands of Americans into debt each year. As Reid has learned, it is possible to make health care universal and affordable in a free-market economy.

Children learn based on their teachers-- and often national policy regarding education. This month's issue of Foreign Policy explores how the way Germany and France teach economics may spell a dismal economic future.

Millions of children are being raised on prejudice and disinformation. Educated in schools that teach a skewed ideology, they are exposed to a dogma that runs counter to core beliefs shared by many other Western countries. They study from textbooks filled with a doctrine of dissent, which they learn to recite as they prepare to attend many of the better universities in the world. Extracting these children from the jaws of bias could mean the difference between world prosperity and menacing global rifts. And doing so will not be easy. But not because these children are found in the madrasas of Pakistan or the state-controlled schools of Saudi Arabia. They are not. Rather, they live in two of the world’s great democracies—France and Germany.