Bibliothek

Notizen: In January 1999, 11 member countries of the European Union ‘irrevocably’ locked the foreign exchange values of their currencies to the euro, and they committed themselves to abandon their currencies in favour of the euro in 2002. As a result, these countries ceased to operate independent monetary policies. Monetary policy for the whole euro-zone became the responsibility of the European Central Bank (ECB), whose primary objective is to maintain a low and stable rate of price inflation for the euro currency. The rules governing Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) were laid down in the treaty of Maastricht in 1992. As conditions for entry to EMU, the treaty specified ‘convergence criteria’ which consisted of upper limits for several macroeconomic aggregates including, notably, a 3 per cent maximum for the ratio of the public sector deficit to GDP and 60 per cent for the ratio of public debt to GDP.1 In February 1998 the 11 applicant countries submitted statistical analyses relating to their satisfaction of these conditions. Despite doubts as to whether some of them had strictly met the conditions, the European Commission deemed them all eligible, and the euro was launched.2 The British government, though more clearly eligible than most other EU countries on the basis of the convergence criteria, decided to defer its decision on entry. In this paper we consider the arguments for and against Economic and Monetary Union, and in particular whether it would be in Britain’s interest to join. We begin with a brief review of the state of the European economy and an analysis of the first year performance of the new Euro currency.[Upper limi][Notable ca]

Notizen: Britain’s education system was radically transformed during the 1990s following the Education Reform Act (1988). The primary objective of these reforms was to raise educational standards through the creation of a quasi–market based upon greater parental choice and the transfer of control over resources from local education authorities to schools. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effects of the quasi–market on efficiency and equity in the secondary education sector in England during the 1990s. Two primary questions are addressed. Has the quasi–market led to an improvement in efficiency in the secondary education sector? Has the quasi–market had any adverse consequences on the social segregation of pupils between schools? Using data obtained from the Schools’ Census and the School Performance Tables, we find strong evidence that the quasi–market has led to a substantial improvement in efficiency (as measured by a school’s exam performance and by the productivity of staff) during the 1990s. The same market forces have led to a greater social segregation of pupils between schools.

Notizen: This paper identifies the determinants of costs per pupil in English secondary schools. A distinction is made between the short run and the long run in order to estimate the separate effects on costs per pupil of short-run variations in school output and school size. A school’s capacity utilization rate is used to indicate short-run deviations in output from pupil capacity, and pupil capacity is used as an indicator of school size to capture scale effects on costs per pupil. The statistical analysis uses both published and unpublished data for secondary schools in England. Two separate analyses are undertaken, one for grant-maintained schools alone and the other for all schools. A separate analysis is undertaken for grant-maintained schools since cost data are available only for schools in this sector. Staff hours per pupil is used as a proxy for costs per pupil for schools as a whole. The main finding is that costs per pupil and staff hours per pupil are both highly significantly negatively related to both school size and the capacity utilization rate of schools. A range of other variables are also estimated to have a significant effect on costs per pupil in secondary schools. The main finding is that there is scope for reducing the costs of schooling in the secondary schools sector in England.

Notizen: This paper investigates spatial disparities in unemployment in three Member States of the EU. It attempts to identify the factors responsible for the persistence of regional unemployment disparities in Germany, Italy and the UK during 1984-94. The empirical results indicate that a substantial proportion of the variation in unemployment rates between NUTS2 level regions can be explained by regional disparities in three key variables: unit labour costs, the industry mix and employment density. The findings are consistent with the view that regional unemployment disparities are explained primarily by regional disparities in economic competitiveness.〈section xml:id="abs1-2"〉〈title type="main"〉ZUSAMMENFASSUNODieser Artikel untersucht die räumlichen Unterschiede in der Höhe der Arbeitslosigkeit in drei Mitgliedsstaaten der EU. Er basiert auf dem Versuch, die Faktoren zu bestimmen, die im Zeitraum zwischen 1984 und 1994 für die Persistenz von regionalen Unterschieden der Höhe der Arbeitslosigkeit in Deutschland, Italien und Grossbritannien verantwortlich waren. Die empirischen Ergeb-nisse zeigen, dass ein wesentlicher Teil der Unterschiede in der Höhe der Arbeitslosigkeit zwischen NUTS2 Regionen durch eine regional unterschiedliche Ausprägung von drei wichtigen Variablen erklärt werden kann: Lohnstückkosten, Wirtschaftsstruktur und Zahl der Arbeitsplätze pro Quadratkilometer. Die Ergebnisse bestätigen die Ansicht, dass die regional unterschiedlich hohe Arbeitslosigkeit hauptsächlich durch Unterschiede der regionalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu cr-klüren ist.〈section xml:id="abs1-3"〉〈title type="main"〉RÉSUMÉCe document examine les disparités géographiques du chǒmage dans trois États membres de l'Union Européenne. Nous essayerons d'identifier les facteurs responsables de la persistance des disparités en chǒmage régional en Ailemagne, en Italie el au Royaume-Uni pendant la période 1984-94. Les résultats empiriques indiquent qu'une proportion importante de la variation du taux de chǒmage entre les régions de la catégorie NUTS2 peut s'expliquer par des disparités régionales en trois variables prépondérantes: le coǔt unitaire d'emploi, la structure industrielle et la densité d'emploi. Les résultats coïncident avec l'avis que les disparités du chǒmage régional s'expliquent surtout par les disparités régionales en compétitivitééconomique.

Notizen: The Youth Training programme (YT), formerly known as the YouthTraining Scheme, has been in existence for over 11 years. During thattime the objectives and content of the programme have changed, and sotoo has the institutional framework within which the school-to-worktransition takes place. Provides a detailed account of the historicaldevelopment of the YT programme, and highlights a number of structuralcharacteristics of the programme that raise implications for theeconometric assessment of the programme's impact on employmentprobabilities and wages. Presents a review and assessment of the UKliterature on the econometric evaluation of YT. Concludes by raising anumber of implications for future research.

Notizen: Evaluates the use of water-based coating systems for industrial construction maintenance, as compared to the traditional, but more environmentally hazardous, solvent-based systems. Concludes that, when an appropriate system is chosen, the performance of water-based systems stands up to comparison with that of their conventional solvent-based equivalents.