فایل ورد کامل آسیب پذیری و ارتجاع اقتصادی

توجه : به همراه فایل word این محصول فایل پاورپوینت (PowerPoint) و اسلاید های آن به صورت هدیه ارائه خواهد شد

این مقاله، ترجمه شده یک مقاله مرجع و معتبر انگلیسی می باشد که به صورت بسیار عالی توسط متخصصین این رشته ترجمه شده است و به صورت فایل ورد (microsoft word) ارائه می گردد

متن داخلی مقاله بسیار عالی، پر محتوا و قابل درک می باشد و شما از استفاده ی آن بسیار لذت خواهید برد. ما عالی بودن این مقاله را تضمین می کنیم

فایل ورد این مقاله بسیار خوب تایپ شده و قابل کپی و ویرایش می باشد و تنظیمات آن نیز به صورت عالی انجام شده است؛ به همراه فایل ورد این مقاله یک فایل پاور پوینت نیز به شما ارئه خواهد شد که دارای یک قالب بسیار زیبا و تنظیمات نمایشی متعدد می باشد

توجه : در صورت مشاهده بهم ریختگی احتمالی در متون زیر ،دلیل ان کپی کردن این مطالب از داخل فایل می باشد و در فایل اصلی فایل ورد کامل آسیب پذیری و ارتجاع اقتصادی،به هیچ وجه بهم ریختگی وجود ندارد

تعداد صفحات این فایل: ۲۹ صفحه

این مقاله به بررسی ابعاد روش شناسی و مفهومی مربوط به ارتجاع اقتصادی و اندازه گیری آن پرداخت. شاخص ارایه شده در این جا چهار بعد ارتجاع اقتصادی، یعنی ثبات و پایداری اقتصادی کلان، ثبات و پایداری اقتصادی خرذ، کارایی بازار، نظارت خوب و توسعه اجتماعی را در نظر گرفت. هر یک از این مولفه ها دارای متغیر هایی هستند که برای اندازه گیری میزان مناسبت و شایستکی چارجوب سیاسی برای جذب و خنثی سازی اثرات شوک های اقتصادی مناسب می باشند.
نتایج این مطالعه می تواند دلیل این که چرا کشور های ذاتا آسیب پذیر سطح بالایی از تولید ناخالص داخلی سرانه را دارند به ما بگوید. چنین استدلال می شود که کشور ها از نظر اقتصادی موفق می باشند زیرا آن ها ذاتا آسیب پذیر نیستند و زیرا آن ها در مواجهه با آسیب پذیری ارتجاع و انعطاف پذیری بالایی دارند. هم چنین این موضوع نیز صادق است که کشور ها به دلیل عدم ارتجاع کافی ممکن است موفق نباشند.
این مقاله هم چنین نشان داد که تولید ناخالص سرانه داخلی ارتباط مثبتی با ارتجاع اقتصادی و ارتباط منفی با آسیب پذیری اقتصادی دارد. به علاوه، تولید سرانه ناخالص داخلی به متغیر های ارتجاع بسیار حساس تر
از متغیر های آسیب پذیری است.

عنوان انگلیسی:Economic Vulnerability and Resilience~~en~~

Introduction1 Many small states2 manage to generate a relatively high GDP per capita in comparison to other developing countries3 in spite of their high exposure to exogenous economic shocks. This would seem to suggest that there are factors which may offset the disadvantages associated with economic vulnerability. This phenomenon is termed by Briguglio (2003) as the ‘Singapore paradox’, referring to the reality that although Singapore is highly exposed to exogenous shocks, this small island state has managed to register high rates of economic growth and to attain high GDP per capita. This reality can be explained in terms of the ability of Singapore to build its resilience in the face of external shocks. Economic vulnerability, from the conceptual and empirical viewpoints, is welldocumented in the literature (see, for example, Briguglio 1995, 2003; Atkins, Mazzi and Easter 2000). Most studies on economic vulnerability provide empirical evidence that small states, particularly island ones, tend to be characterized by high degrees of economic openness and export concentration. These lead to exposure to exogenous shocks, that is, economic vulnerability, which could constitute a disadvantage to economic development by magnifying the element of risk in the growth process, without necessarily compromising the overall viability. Cordina (2004a, 2004b) shows that increased risk can adversely affect economic growth as the negative effects of downside shocks would be commensurately larger than those of positive shocks. The high degree of fluctuations in GDP and in export earnings registered by many small states is considered as one of the manifestations of exposure to exogenous shocks. This paper is structured as follows. The next section revisits the so-called ‘Singapore Paradox’. Sections 3 and 4 respectively deal with the definitions of economic vulnerability and economic resilience. Section 5 reviews alternative approaches towards constructing a resilience index and presents the results of a feasible methodology. Section 6 deals with the relationship between GDP per capita, resilience and vulnerability. The potential uses of the resilience index are discussed in section 7. Section 8 concludes the study with some implications relating to the resilience index. 2 The ‘Singapore paradox’ The ‘Singapore paradox’ refers to the seeming contradiction that a country can be highly exposed to exogenous shocks, rendering it economically vulnerable and yet still manages to attain high levels of GDP per capita. Briguglio (2003, 2004) explains this in terms of the juxtaposition of economic vulnerability and economic resilience and proposes a methodological approach in this regard. In this approach, economic vulnerability is ascribed to inherent conditions affecting a country’s exposure to exogenous shocks, while economic resilience is associated with actions undertaken by policymakers and private economic agents which enable a country to withstand or recover from the negative effects of shocks. Actions which enable a country to better benefit from positive shocks are also considered to be conducive to economic resilience.4 On the basis of this approach, Briguglio (2004) identifies four possible scenarios into which countries may be placed according to their vulnerability and resilience characteristics. These scenarios are termed as best case, worst case, self-made, and prodigal son. The best-case category applies to countries that are not inherently vulnerable and which, at the same time, adopt resilience-building policies. The worst-case category refers to countries that compound the adverse effects of inherently high vulnerability by adopting policies that run counter to economic resilience. Countries classified as self-made are those with a high degree of inherent economic vulnerability, but which are economically resilient through the adoption of appropriate policies that enable them to cope with or withstand the effects of their inherent vulnerability. Countries falling within the prodigal son category are those with a relatively low degree of inherent economic vulnerability but whose policies are deleterious to economic resilience, thereby exposing them to the adverse effects of shocks.5 These four scenarios are depicted in Figure 1, where the axes measure inherent economic vulnerability and nurtured resilience, respectively. This method of defining vulnerability in terms of inherent features and resilience in terms of policy-induced changes has a number of advantages. First, the vulnerability index would refer to permanent (or quasi-permanent) features over which a country can practically exercise no control and therefore cannot be attributed to inadequate policies. In other words, countries scoring highly on the index cannot be accused of inflicting vulnerability on themselves through misguided policy approaches. Second, the resilience index would refer to what a country can do to mitigate or exacerbate its inherent vulnerability.

$$en!!