Search results

"Drawing on Kaleckian and Kaldorian approaches, Political Economy of Contemporary Italy: The Economic Crisis and State Intervention explores the reasons behind the stagnation of the Italian economy from the 1970s, and suggests policy solutions to ease the crisis. The central thesis of the book is that from the early 1990s Italy experienced a constant reduction of both private and public investment which, combined with increasing labour precariousness and wage moderation, contributed to the decline of both labour productivity and economic growth. It is argued that lack of industrial policies amplified the problem of the poor macroeconomic performance, since Italian firms - small sized and non-innovating - were incapable of staying competitive on the global scene. Net exports did not compensate for the decline of public spending, private investment and consumption. It is also shown that, in these respects, Italy presents an interesting case-study with wider ramifications for it was involved in the global process of intensifying the neoliberal agenda but at a faster rate than other OECD countries. The book concludes with a call for an alternative economic policy in order to promote innovation, reduce unemployment and stimulate economic growth. This book marks a significant contribution to the literature on the recent history of the European economy, Italian studies, and the history of economic thought. Nicolò Giangrande is an economic researcher at the Giuseppe Di Vittorio Foundation (Italy), professor and director of the Cátedra Barão do Rio Branco at the U:VERSE University Centre (Brazil), and teaching assistant in Political Economy at the University of Salento (Italy)."

Drawing on Kaleckian and Kaldorian approaches, Political Economy of Contemporary Italy: The Economic Crisis and State Intervention explores the reasons behind the stagnation of the Italian economy from the 1970s and suggests policy solutions to ease the crisis. The central thesis of the book is that from the early 1990s Italy experienced a constant reduction of both private and public investment which, combined with increasing labour precariousness and wage moderation, contributed to the decline of both labour productivity and economic growth. It is argued that lack of industrial policies amplified the problem of the poor macroeconomic performance, since Italian firms - small-sized and non-innovating - were incapable of staying competitive on the global scene. Net exports did not compensate for the decline of public spending, private investment and consumption. It is also shown that, in these respects, Italy presents an interesting case study with wider ramifications for it was involved in the global process of intensifying the neoliberal agenda but at a faster rate than other OECD countries. The book concludes with a call for an alternative economic policy in order to promote innovation, reduce unemployment and stimulate economic growth. This book marks a significant contribution to the literature on the recent history of the European economy, Italian studies and the history of economic thought.

This article examines the consequences of the Russian-Ukrainian war on the Italian economy, in particular on production and inflation, and assesses its impact on wages and employment. The article shows how Italy, which in the pre-war period had not yet reabsorbed all the negative effects of the 2008 financial crisis and the 2020 pandemic, is again in great difficulty due to its economic structural weaknesses. The article indicates the need for an economic policy aimed at wage growth, reindustrialisation and, finally, full and good employment. ; Questo articolo esamina le conseguenze della guerra russo-ucraina sull'economia italiana, in particolare sulla produzione e sull'inflazione, e ne valuta l'impatto sui salari e sull'occupazione. L'articolo mostra come l'Italia, che nel periodo prebellico non aveva ancora riassorbito tutti gli effetti negativi della crisi finanziaria del 2008 e di quella pandemica del 2020, sia nuovamente in forte difficoltà a causa delle debolezze strutturali della sua economia. L'articolo indica la necessità di una politica economica che abbia come obiettivo la crescita dei salari, la reindustrializzazione e, infine, la piena e buona occupazione.

The marine aquarium industry has great potential to generate jobs in low-income coastal communities creating incentives for the maintenance of a healthy coral reef, if effectively managed. In the absence of current monitoring or legislation to govern the trade, baseline information regarding the species, number and source location of animals traded is missing despite being critical for its successful management and sustainability. An industry assessment to establish the number and provenance of species of ornamental polychaetes (sabellids and serpulids) traded was undertaken across UK wholesalers and retailers. Six geographical regions exporting fan worms were identified. Singapore contributed the highest percentage of imports, but of only one worm "type" whereas Bali, the second largest source, supplied five different worm "types". Over 50% of UK retailers were supplied by one wholesaler while the remainder were stocked by a mixture of one other wholesaler and/or direct imports from the source country. We estimate that up to 18,500 ornamental polychaetes (16,980 sabellids and 1,018 serpulids) are sold annually in the UK revealing a drastic underestimation of currently accepted trade figures. Incorrect identification (based on exporting region or visual characteristics) of traded animals exacerbates the inaccuracy in market quantification, although identification of preserved sabellids using published keys proved just as inconclusive with high within-species variability and the potential for new or cryptic species. A re-description of the polychaete groups traded using a combination of molecular and morphological techniques is necessary for effective identification and market quantification. This study provides the first assessment of ornamental polychaetes but more importantly highlights the issues surrounding the collection of baseline information necessary to manage the aquarium trade. We recommend that future management should be community based and site-specific with financial and educational support from NGOs, local governments and industry members.

The state-of-art on alien species in the Mediterranean Sea is presented, making distinctions among the four subregions defined in the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive: (i) the Western Mediterranean Sea (WMED); (ii) the Central Mediterranean Sea (CMED); (iii) the Adriatic Sea (ADRIA); and (iv) the Eastern Mediterranean Sea (EMED). The updated checklist (December 2010) of marine alien species within each subregion, along with their acclimatization status and origin, is provided. A total of 955 alien species is known in the Mediterranean, the vast majority of them having being introduced in the EMED (718), less in the WMED (328) and CMED (267) and least in the Adriatic (171). Of these, 535 species (56%) are established in at least one area.Despite the collective effort of experts who attempted in this work, the number of introduced species remains probably underestimated. Excluding microalgae, for which knowledge is still insufficient, aliens have increased the total species richness of the Mediterranean Sea by 5.9%. This figure should not be directly read as an indication of higher biodiversity, as spreading of so many aliens within the basin is possibly causing biotic homogenization. Thermophilic species, i.e. Indo-Pacific, Indian Ocean, Red Sea, Tropical Atlantic, Tropical Pacific, and circum(sub)tropical, account for 88.4% of the introduced species in the EMED, 72.8% in the CMED, 59.3% in the WMED and 56.1% in the Adriatic. Cold water species, i.e. circumboreal, N Atlantic, and N Pacific, make up a small percentage of the introduced species, ranging between 4.2% and 21.6% and being more numerous in the Adriatic and less so in the EMED.Species that are classified as invasive or potentially invasive are 134 in the whole of the Mediterranean: 108 are present in the EMED, 76 in the CMED, 53 in the Adriatic and 64 in the WMED. The WMED hosts most invasive macrophytes, whereas the EMED has the lion's share in polychaetes, crustaceans, molluscs and fish.

The state-of-art on alien species in the Mediterranean Sea is presented, making distinctions among the four subregions defined in the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive: (i) the Western Mediterranean Sea (WMED); (ii) the Central Mediterranean Sea (CMED); (iii) the Adriatic Sea (ADRIA); and (iv) the Eastern Mediterranean Sea (EMED). The updated checklist (December 2010) of marine alien species within each subregion, along with their acclimatization status and origin, is provided. A total of 955 alien species is known in the Mediterranean, the vast majority of them having being introduced in the EMED (718), less in the WMED (328) and CMED (267) and least in the Adriatic (171). Of these, 535 species (56%) are established in at least one area.Despite the collective effort of experts who attempted in this work, the number of introduced species remains probably underestimated. Excluding microalgae, for which knowledge is still insufficient, aliens have increased the total species richness of the Mediterranean Sea by 5.9%. This figure should not be directly read as an indication of higher biodiversity, as spreading of so many aliens within the basin is possibly causing biotic homogenization. Thermophilic species, i.e. Indo-Pacific, Indian Ocean, Red Sea, Tropical Atlantic, Tropical Pacific, and circum(sub)tropical, account for 88.4% of the introduced species in the EMED, 72.8% in the CMED, 59.3% in the WMED and 56.1% in the Adriatic. Cold water species, i.e. circumboreal, N Atlantic, and N Pacific, make up a small percentage of the introduced species, ranging between 4.2% and 21.6% and being more numerous in the Adriatic and less so in the EMED.Species that are classified as invasive or potentially invasive are 134 in the whole of the Mediterranean: 108 are present in the EMED, 76 in the CMED, 53 in the Adriatic and 64 in the WMED. The WMED hosts most invasive macrophytes, whereas the EMED has the lion's share in polychaetes, crustaceans, molluscs and fish.

The authors regret that Table 2 of the article (ZENETOS et al., 2011) contained some errors. The errors pertain to nomenclature changes and the distribution/establishment success of alien species in the Mediterranean MSFD areas.