Global Politico-Economic Dynamics during a Local Conflict: Reciprocal Patterns of Cooperation and Sanctions

Natural resources utilization efficiency evaluation, determinant of productivity change, and production technology heterogeneity across developed and developing G20 economies

Environmental degradation poses a significant global challenge which necessitates innovative strategies to achieve sustainability. This study investigates the impact of technological innovation (TCN), higher education (EDU), green finance (GRF), globalization (GLI), and entrepreneurship (ENT) on environmental quality (EQ) in G20 countries. The study uses panel data from 2000 to 2020 to investigate relationships between study variables. Among the various diagnostic tests conducted, the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) confirms that multicollinearity is not present. Furthermore, the cross-sectional dependence (CSD) test identifies cross-sectional interdependence among the study variables. Moreover, the slope homogeneity (SL) test indicates heterogeneity in the data. For the stationarity check, the Cross-Sectional Augmented Im–Pesaran–Shin (CIPS) test indicates mixed results. Finally, the study uses the Cross-Sectionally Augmented Autoregressive Distributed Lag (CS-ARDL) and the Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) for the long- and short-run analysis of variables. The outcomes of CS-ARDL indicate that GLI has a significant negative impact on EQ, hence causing deterioration in G20 economies. On the other hand, TCN, EDU, GRF, and ENT show positive and significant impacts on EQ, therefore enhancing environmental outcomes. Additionally, the Dumitrescu–Hurlin causality test reveals bidirectional causality, which highlights the interconnected relationship between TCN and ENT with EQ. However, GRF, EDU, and GLI demonstrate unidirectional causality with EQ. The takeaway of the study focuses on the importance of policies in promoting green innovation, resource efficiency, and sustainable practices to advance environmental quality within G20 economies.

In this article we look at productivity trends, drivers of productivity growth and pro-productivity policies across the G20 economies since 1970. We distinguish between three sub-groups of G20 economies: a “leading but slowing” group of the most developed economies, a “lagging but growing” group of economies that have shown rapid growth and a “muddling through” group of economies with no sustained improvement in productivity performance. We find distinctly different dynamics between the sub-groups regarding the contributions of capital deepening and total factor productivity (TFP) to labour productivity growth. The slowdown in labour productivity growth since the 2010s has been underpinned by lower TFP growth. India is the only G20 economy which has experienced a significant improvement in TFP growth over the past few decades. We develop a typology distinguishing five domains of pro-productivity policies (accumulation of the factors of production, markets and resource allocation, technological and structural change, internationalisation, and foundational policies) and explore how these have been applied across countries and over time. We also provide a more detailed analysis of productivity and related policies for two G20 countries: India and South Korea. We argue that a revival of productivity growth in the G20 requires a greater focus on policies which balance technological progress with knowledge diffusion; more investment in intangibles and public assets; and improvements in the quality of human capital.

The impact of energy efficiency on ecological footprint in the presence of EKC: Evidence from G20 countries

This research investigates how oil price fluctuations affect stock market performance across G20 countries, utilizing the BEKK and DCC-GARCH models to model dynamic linkages and volatility cross-contagion between the two markets. An analysis is conducted from January 2004 to January 2021, examining the impact of oil price volatility on stock market performance and also contemplating the reverse relationship. We perform a research study in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The BEKK model enables us to estimate fluctuating conditional correlations over time, whereas the DCC-GARCH model offers a deeper understanding of the progressing dynamics that govern the relationships among variables. Our data analysis shows sizable reciprocal causation; the impact of oil price fluctuations on stock market performance is noticeable across the G20 economies. Volatility in the stock market is shown to be influenced by shifts in oil prices, thereby presenting their complex connection. Grasping these dynamics is crucial for both investors and policymakers in an unstable market environment and times of worldwide uncertainty. The study sheds novel insights into how monetary shock transfers happen, providing significant contributions to understanding market interdependence and the influence of commodities on market conditions.

The circular economy (CE) has acquired significant interest for its potential to contribute to sustainable development (SD). The present study utilizes empirical methodology, specifically panel data analysis, to examine the distinct effects and outcomes of the circular economy and its associated factors within a unified framework. The focus is on the G20 countries from 2008 to 2021. We evaluated the influence of various CE value sources (renewable energy consumption, composting rate, repair services availability, recycling rate) and a factor-analysis-derived measure of the CE on economic, environmental, and social aspects of SD. The objective was to assess the distinct effects and outcomes of CE and its components in a unified framework-the analysis utilized panel data from G20 countries from 2008 to 2021. Our findings show a substantial influence of CE in achieving SD, with positive implications for the economy, environment, and society. However, the impact of each CE value source on the SD dimensions shows variation. While renewable energy consumption (RENEC) and composting rate (CR) lessen environmental impact, recycling rate (RR) shows no significant effect, and repair services availability (RSA) increases the Ecological Footprint (EFP). Notably, RSA is the sole CE component, showing a positive economic impact at the national level. Additionally, RENEC, RSA, and RR contribute to reducing the inflation rate (INFR). Policymakers should undertake detailed impact assessments to develop effective, tailored strategies based on each country's unique goals. The findings of this study have important policy implications, particularly in terms of emphasizing targeted strategies for implementing CE practices to achieve sustainable development.

This study aims to examine the fundamental determinants of economic growth in G20 countries in the context of institutional structure, innovation, and education. The significance of the research lies in revealing that sustainable economic growth is shaped not only by traditional macroeconomic factors but also by the effectiveness of institutions, innovation capacity, and human capital investments. The existing literature contains limited studies that comprehensively address the interactions between these three variables and economic growth, specifically in G20 countries. The study applies panel data analysis to G20 countries for the period 2005–2024 and performs panel Granger causality analysis using fixed and random effects models after horizontal section dependence, unit root, and cointegration tests. Empirical findings show that institutions, innovation, and education variables have significant and positive effects on economic growth. Granger causality test results reveal that these variables unidirectionally drive growth, while growth has no feedback effect on these factors. The findings indicate that strengthening institutional reforms, encouraging R&D and innovation investments, and increasing human capital capacity are critical for sustainable and high-quality economic growth for policymakers.

By January 2022, 156 countries had submitted new or updated nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. This study analyses the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and macroeconomic impacts of the new NDCs. The total impact of the updated unconditional and conditional NDCs of these countries on global emission levels by 2030 is an additional reduction of about 3.8 and 3.9 GtCO2eq, respectively, compared to the previously submitted NDCs as of October 2020. However, this total reduction must be about three times greater to be consistent with keeping global temperature increase to well below 2 °C, and even seven times greater for 1.5 °C. Nine G20 economies have pledged stronger emission reduction targets for 2030 in their updated NDCs, leading to additional aggregated GHG emission reductions of about 3.3 GtCO2eq, compared to those in the previous NDCs. The socio-economic impacts of the updated NDCs are limited in major economies and largely depend on the emission reduction effort included in the NDCs. However, two G20 economies have submitted new targets that will lead to an increase in emissions of about 0.3 GtCO2eq, compared to their previous NDCs. The updated NDCs of non-G20 economies contain further net reductions. We conclude that countries should strongly increase the ambition levels of their updated NDC submissions to keep the climate goals of the Paris Agreement within reach.

Robotics and the automation of knowledge work, often referred to as AI (artificial intelligence), are presented in the media as likely to have massive impacts, for better or worse, on jobs skills, organizations and society. The article deconstructs the dominant hype-and-fear narrative. Claims on net job loss emerge as exaggerated, but there will be considerable skills disruption and change in the major global economies over the next 12 years. The term AI has been hijacked, in order to suggest much more going on technologically than can be the case. The article reviews critically the research evidence so far, including the author’s own, pointing to eight major qualifiers to the dominant discourse of major net job loss from a seamless, overwhelming AI wave sweeping fast through the major economies. The article questions many assumptions: that automation creates few jobs short or long term; that whole jobs can be automated; that the technology is perfectible; that organizations can seamlessly and quickly deploy AI; that humans are machines that can be replicated; and that it is politically, socially and economically feasible to apply these technologies. A major omission in all studies is factoring in dramatic increases in the amount of work to be done. Adding in ageing populations, productivity gaps and skills shortages predicted across many G20 countries, the danger might be too little, rather than too much labour. The article concludes that, if there is going to be a Robo-Apocalypse, this will be from a collective failure to adjust to skills change over the next 12 years. But the debate needs to be widened to the impact of eight other technologies that AI insufficiently represents in the popular imagination and that, in combination, could cause a techno-apocalypse.

Background: Cardiovascular Disease (CVDs) is the leading cause of deaths amongst G20 countries accounting for 35.44% deaths in the G20 Countries. The G20 countries, being major economies, have a significant impact on global environmental conditions. Method: Using Global Burden of Disease tool, we estimated the deaths and Disability adjusted life years (DALYs) stratified by age, sex, year, and location due to CVD attributable to environmental risk factors across the G20 Countries from 1990-2019. Results: From 1990-2019, the annual percentage change showed a 37% rise in deaths, rising from 2,608,027-3,571,390. During the same period, DALYs surged by 25%, going from 63,297,319-78,964,495. However, when evaluating the age-standardized rates, both deaths and DALYs displayed a decrease from 1990 to 2019. In 2019, Saudi Arabia recorded the highest ASMR rate at 114 (with a range of 92-137) per 100,000. Bulgaria closely followed with a rate of 113 (87-141). In terms of age-standardized DALYs rates, Saudi Arabia again stood out, registering the highest in 1990 with a value of 2573 ( 2069-3145). Evaluating by age groups, 80-84 year old witnessed the most significant death count in 2019 (527,371). Meanwhile, the age group of 65-69 years saw the highest DALYs count in 2019, (10.4 million). Over the last three decades, males consistently experienced higher counts of both deaths and DALYs compared to females. Conclusion: Environmental risk factors contributed to 26.78% of CVD-related deaths and 29% of DALYs, underscoring the critical role of environment in cardiovascular health outcomes in G20 Countries. it's essential to integrate environmental risk assessments into routine check-ups and tailor treatment plans that address specific environmental exposures linked to CVD. There's an urgent need for policy reforms promoting environmental health, coupled with widespread community education about the environmental determinants of cardiovascular diseases.

This study aims to evaluate how key financial, educational, technological, and institutional drivers shape resource efficiency (RCE), a critical pillar of sustainable development—across major economies. Enhancing RCE is vital for ensuring long-term ecological and economic stability while meeting global sustainability targets. Using panel data from 2000 to 2022 for G20 countries, this research examines the dynamic effects of natural resources (NRSs), educational quality (EDQ), financial inclusion (FIN), green innovation (GRI), and economic complexity (ECC) on RCE. The Cross-Sectional Autoregressive Distributed Lag (CS-ARDL) model is applied to capture both short- and long-term relationships and is validated by robustness checks using the Augmented Mean Group (AMG) and Common Correlated Effects Mean Group (CCEMG) estimators. The results show that EDQ and FIN exert a negative influence on RCE, suggesting that governance inefficiencies occur when aligning education systems and financial mechanisms with sustainability goals. In contrast, NRS, GRI, and ECC significantly enhance RCE, underscoring the value of resource stewardship, innovation-driven transitions, and complex economic structures in promoting efficiency. These findings have governance implications, emphasizing the need for institutional reforms that integrate sustainability into the education and financial sectors while supporting green innovation and economic diversification. Policymakers in G20 economies are urged to implement coherent strategies that redirect educational and financial frameworks toward inclusive, resilient, and resource-efficient development pathways, thereby advancing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

As the group of the world’s largest economies and biggest emitters, G20 countries are central to implementing solutions to the climate emergency. This discussion paper assesses to what extent they are setting climate mitigation targets that are ambitious enough and/or meet their fair share of global emissions reductions consistent with limiting global heating to 1.5°C. It applies three different methodologies to assess their pledges. Despite some differences between these methodologies, the paper finds that the G20 countries – both collectively, and almost all of them individually – are failing to achieve their fair share of ambitious global mitigation required to limit global heating to 1.5°C, regardless of which assessment methodology is applied. Additionally, the assessment shows that the high-income G20 member countries are pledging to do a much smaller fraction of their fair share as compared to the middle-income countries. The G7 countries among the G20, in particular, appear to now be focusing their attention on the increase of ambition of middle-income and low-income countries while not recognising the need to also substantially increase the ambition in their own 2030 pledges. Additionally, the G7 countries continue to fail to recognise the need to commit to individual long-term climate finance to low and middle-income countries, at a scale much higher than what they currently provide, to enable rapid and just transitions to climate-resilient and low-carbon societies powered by renewable energy. This analysis highlights that G20 countries must both urgently, and before COP28 in December 2023, raise the ambition of their pledges for action by 2030, ramp up their provision of international climate finance and increase their international cooperation and support.

Aperennial topic of discussion among scholars and policymakers is how best to think about a benchmark for macroeconomics as it applies to monetary policy. Should the benchmark for policy analysis be the open economy with international interest rate linkages and flexible exchange rates (after all, major economies are in fact open with flexible exchange rates), or should it be the closed economy in which such linkages and exchange rate adjustments are assumed away? Of course, few if any policy makers would seek to guide policy by ignoring capital flows and exchange rates, but in many cases it appears as though the starting point for analysis is the closed‐economy macro model, these days a variant of the dynamic new Keynesian model. Those who start from a closed‐economy framework often have questions about how “openness” influences the analysis. How does the neutral real interest depend on “global” developments? Is the Phillips curve trade‐off between inflation and domestic output better or worse in the open versus the closed economy? Is “potential GDP” a function of global developments, or only of domestic resources available and domestic productivity? Perhaps most important, how—if at all—does openness influence the optimalmonetary policy rule? Is a Taylor rule the rightmonetary policy for an open economy? In 2002 Jordi Gali, Mark Gertler, and I published a paper in the Journal of Monetary Economics that developed a benchmark (at least in ourway of thinking) dynamic two‐country optimizing macro model of optimal monetary policies in the open economy. Our focus in that paper was deriving optimal policy rules in the two‐country model and assessing the gains from international monetary policy cooperation. In that paper, we emphasized the following implications of the model:

Economic growth must be balanced with ecological sustainability as G20 nations face mounting environmental concerns and sustainability challenges. These countries account for the majority of global economic output and emissions, making them pivotal in efforts to reduce ecological footprints while fostering innovation and economic progress. This study introduces a novel approach by integrating advanced econometric methods such as Cross-Sectional Augmented ARDL (CS-ARDL), Augmented Mean Group (AMG), Common Correlated Effects Mean Group (CCEMG), and Granger causality tests to comprehensively analyze the dynamic relationships between ecological footprint (EFP), environmental policies (EP), renewable energy consumption (REC), capital formation (CF), and innovation (INN) in G20 countries from 1990 to 2023. The key novelty of this study lies in its methodological rigor and ability to address cross-sectional dependence and heterogeneity within the G20 economies. Unlike prior research, this study simultaneously examines linear, nonlinear, and interaction effects, providing a holistic understanding of how economic and environmental factors interact over time. The CS-ARDL results highlight that environmental policies, innovation, and renewable energy consumption drive ecological sustainability, with REC playing the most significant role in reducing EFP over time. The findings on capital formation and economic growth further emphasize that sustainable development hinges on strategic investments in human and physical capital. By leveraging AMG and CCEMG methodologies, this research strengthens the robustness of its findings, ensuring their validity across diverse economic contexts. Granger causality analysis reveals a bidirectional relationship between EFP and innovation and a unidirectional link between REC and EP, underscoring the critical role of renewable energy in shaping environmental policy. This study offers groundbreaking empirical insights into the economic, environmental, and innovation dynamics of G20 nations, advocating for policies that prioritize renewable energy, technological advancements, and sustainable capital investments. Future research should explore sector-specific dynamics and the socio-political dimensions of sustainable development pathways.

The study analyzes the impact of economic growth, green innovations in Information and Communication Technology (ICT), and environmental legislation on the Load Capacity Factor (LCF) in G20 countries, employing data from 1993 to 2021. A comprehensive econometric analysis emphasizes the essential function of strong environmental legislation and green ICT developments in improving LCF, hence promoting a sustainable harmony between economic activities and environmental well-being. The study indicates that the integration of green ICT solutions and the enhancement of environmental regulations are essential for promoting sustainable development. Policy recommendations encompass the augmentation of environmental tax measures, the promotion of renewable energy investments, and the application of thorough environmental assessments. These techniques are crucial for the G20 countries in order to attain enduring environmental sustainability with economic growth.