DOCSLIB.ORG

United Kingdom?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United Kingdom? How’s Life in the United Kingdom? How’s Life in the United Kingdom? The United Kingdom’s current well-being, 2018 or latest available year CIVIC INCOME AND ENGAGEMENT WEALTH Hav ing House- House- Voter no say in hold gov ernment* income hold turnout w ealth S80/S20 SOCIAL Lack of income share social CONNECTIONS ratio* HOUSING support* Housing Social affordability inter- actions Ov er- crow ding WORK-LIFE Gender rate* BALANCE gap in hours Employ - w orked* ment rate Time off Gender WORK AND w age gap* JOB QUALITY Gender gap in feeling Long hours safe in paid SAFETY w ork* Homicides* Life ex pectancy Negative affect Gap in life balance* Life ex pectancy by education SUBJECTIVE satisfaction Student HEALTH (men)* WELL-BEING Ex posure to Access Students skills in outdoor air to green w ith science pollution* low skills* AVERAGE space KNOWLEDGE INEQUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL AND SKILLS QUALITY Note: This chart shows the United Kingdom’s relative strengths and weaknesses in well-being compared to other OECD countries. Longer bars always indicate better outcomes (i.e. higher wellbeing), whereas shorter bars always indicate worse outcomes (lower well-being) – including for negative indicators, marked with an *, which have been reverse-scored. Inequalities (gaps between top and bottom, differences between groups, people falling under a deprivation threshold) are shaded with stripes, and missing data in white. The United Kingdom’s resources for future well-being, 2018 or latest available year Natural Capital Economic Capital Human Capital Social Capital Educational Greenhouse gas Produced fixed assets attainment of young Trust in others emissions per capita adults … Financial net worth of Trust in Material footprint Premature mortality government government Red List Index of Labour Gender parity in Household debt threatened species underutilisation rate politics Note: ❶=top-performing OECD tier, ❷=middle-performing OECD tier, ❸=bottom-performing OECD tier. ➚ indicates consistent improvement; ↔ indicates no clear or consistent trend; ➘ indicates consistent deterioration, and “…” indicates insufficient time series to determine trends since 2010. For methodological details, see the Reader’s Guide of How’s Life? 2020. HOW’S LIFE? 2020 © OECD 2020 2 For more information Access the complete publication, including information about the methods used to determine trends at: https://doi.org/10.1787/9870c393-en. Find the data used in this country profile at: http://oecd.org/statistics/Better-Life-Initiative-2020-country- notes-data.xlsx. Deprivations in the United Kingdom Deprivations in selected indicators of current well-being, 2018 or latest available year UNITED KINGDOM 12% 32% of the population live in relative would be at risk of falling into poverty if they income poverty had to forgo 3 months of their income 22% 6% of poor households spend more than of the population report low 40% of their income on housing costs life satisfaction 6% 17% say they have no friends or family are not satisfied with how they to turn to in times of need spend their time Source: OECD (2020), How’s Life? 2020: Measuring Well-Being Note: Relative income poverty refers to the share of people with household disposable income below 50% of the national median; financial insecurity refers to the share of individuals who are not income poor, but whose liquid financial assets are insufficient to support them at the level of the national relative income poverty line for at least three months; housing cost overburden refers to the share of households in the bottom 40% of the income distribution spending more than 40% of their disposable income on housing costs; and low satisfaction with life and with time use refer to the share of the population rating their satisfaction as 4 or lower (on a 0-10 scale). HOW’S LIFE? 2020 © OECD 2020 3 Inequalities between men and women in the United Kingdom Gender ratios (distance from parity) for selected indicators of current well-being, 2018 or latest available year Feeling safe 0.79 Earnings 0.84 Adult skills (numeracy) 0.95 (EN) Adult skills (numeracy) 0.95 (NI) Hours worked 0.95 (paid and unpaid) Perceived health 0.96 Time off 0.99 Student skills (science) 1.00 Life satisfaction 1.00 Social support 1.02 Life expectancy 1.05 Job strain 1.26 Social interactions 1.27 Long-term 1.35 unemployment rate Homicide victims // 2.00 Long working hours // 2.75 (in paid work) Deaths from suicide, // 3.21 alcohol, drugs Men doing better OECD average Women doing better Note: Grey bubbles denote no clear difference between men and women, defined as gender ratios within 0.03 points distance to parity. HOW’S LIFE? 2020 © OECD 2020 4 Inequalities between age groups in the United Kingdom Age ratios (distance from parity) for selected indicators of current well-being, 2018 or latest available year A. Younger and middle-aged people Long-term unemployment rate // 0.53 Employment rate 0.64 Earnings 0.68 Job strain 0.80 Having a say in government 0.84 Adult skills (numeracy) (EN) 0.96 Feeling safe 0.96 Adult skills (numeracy) (NI) 0.99 Life satisfaction 1.00 Social support 1.02 Time off 1.06 Satisfaction with time use 1.10 Social interactions 1.29 Long working hours (in paid work) // 2.08 Middle-aged people doing better OECD average Younger people doing better B. Younger and older people Earnings 0.72 Long-term unemployment rate 0.74 Having a say in government 0.75 Employment rate 0.82 Job strain 0.86 Satisfaction with time use 0.91 Life satisfaction 0.98 Adult skills (numeracy) (EN) 0.99 Social support 1.02 Time off 1.03 Feeling safe 1.06 Adult skills (numeracy) (NI) 1.06 Social interactions 1.29 Long working hours (in paid work) // 1.76 Older people doing better OECD average Younger people doing better Note: Age ranges differ according to each indicator and are only broadly comparable. They generally refer to 15-24/29 years for young people, 25/30 to 45/50 years for the middle-aged and 50 years and over for older people. See How’s Life? 2020 for further details. Grey bubbles denote no clear difference between age groups, defined as age ratios within 0.03 points distance to parity. HOW’S LIFE? 2020 © OECD 2020 5 Inequalities between people with different educational attainment in the United Kingdom Education ratios (distance from parity) for selected indicators of current well-being, 2018 or latest available year Job strain // 0.17 Long-term // 0.49 unemployment rate Earnings 0.67 Feeling safe 0.92 Perceived health 0.93 Employment rate 0.94 Life expectancy (men) 0.97 Life satisfaction 0.97 Life expectancy (women) 0.98 Social support 0.99 Satisfaction with time 1.00 use Long working hours 1.26 (in paid work) People with tertiary education doing better OECD average People with upper secondary education doing better Note: Grey bubbles denote no clear difference between groups with different educational attainment, defined as education ratios within 0.03 points distance to parity. HOW’S LIFE? 2020 © OECD 2020 6 Inequalities between top and bottom performers in the United Kingdom Vertical inequalities for selected indicators of current well-being, 2018 or latest available year Household income of the top 20% relative to the bottom 20% Share of wealth owned by the top 10%, percentage 12 90 80 10 70 8 60 52.0 51.7 6.2 50 6 5.4 40 4 30 20 2 10 0 0 Earnings of the top 10% relative to the bottom 10%, PISA score in science of the top 10% relative to the bottom 10% full-time employees 6 2 1.69 1.67 5 4 3.4 3.4 3 1 2 1 0 0 Life satisfaction scores of the top 20% relative to the bottom 20% Satisfaction with time use scores of the top 20% relative to the bottom 20% 4 4 3.33 3 3 2.78 2.1 2.1 2 2 1 1 0 0 Note: For all figures, countries are ranked from left (most unequal) to right (least unequal). HOW’S LIFE? 2020 © OECD 2020 7 Trends in current well-being since 2010 in the United Kingdom - I Household income (household net adjusted disposable income, Average USD at 2017 PPPs*, per capita) OECD GBR ~ 28 000 ~31 000 Household wealth Average (median net wealth, USD at 2016 PPPs) OECD GBR ~162 000 ~232 000 Income andIncome Wealth S80/S20 income share ratio (the household income for the top 20%, Inequality divided by the household income for the bottom 20%) GBR OECD 6.2 5.4 Housing affordability (share of disposable income remaining after Average housing costs) GBR OECD 74.6 79.2 Housing Overcrowding rate (share of households living in overcrowded Inequality conditions) OECD GBR 12 6 Employment rate (employed people aged 25-64, as a share of Average the population of the same age) OECD GBR 76.5 79.3 Gender wage gap (difference between male and female median Inequality wages expressed as a share of male wages) GBR OECD 16.5 12.9 Work and Job Quality Long hours in paid work (share of employees usually working 50+ Inequality hours per week) GBR OECD 11.9 7 Life expectancy (number of years a newborn can expect to Average Health live) OECD GBR 80.5 81.3 Note: The snapshot depicts data for 2018, or the latest available year, for each indicator. The colour of the circle indicates the direction of change, relative to 2010, or the closest available year: = consistent improvement, = consistent deterioration, = no clear trend, and white for insufficient time series to determine trends. The OECD average is marked in black.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Freedom in the Americas Today
    www.freedomhouse.org Freedom in the Americas Today This series of charts and graphs tracks freedoms trajectory in the Americas over the past thirty years. The source for the material in subsequent pages is two global surveys published annually by Freedom House: Freedom in the World and Freedom of the Press. Freedom in the World has assessed the condition of world freedom since 1972, providing separate numerical scores for each countrys degree of political rights and civil liberties as well as designating countries as free, partly free, and not free. Freedom of the Press assesses the level of media freedom in each country in the world and designates countries as free, partly free, and not free. The graphs and charts in this package tell a story that is both encouraging and a source of concern. When Freedom House launched its global index of political rights and civil liberties, freedom was on the defensive throughout much of the Americas. Juntas, military councils, and strongmen held the reins of power throughout much of south and Central America. At various times dictatorships prevailed in such key countries as Brazil, Argentina, Peru, and Chile, as well as in every country of Central America except Costa Rica. Latin America was not alone in the grim picture it presented as democracy was by and large restricted to the countries of Western Europe and North America. Conditions in the Americas were strongly influenced by the Cold War. Marxist insurgencies, often employing kidnappings, assassinations, and terrorism, had emerged in a number of countries; military governments responded with extreme brutality, including the use of paramilitary death squads.
    [Show full text]
  • IOM Regional Strategy 2020-2024 South America
    SOUTH AMERICA REGIONAL STRATEGY 2020–2024 IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society. As an intergovernmental organization, IOM acts with its partners in the international community to: assist in meeting the operational challenges of migration; advance understanding of migration issues; encourage social and economic development through migration; and uphold the human dignity and well-being of migrants. Publisher: International Organization for Migration Av. Santa Fe 1460, 5th floor C1060ABN Buenos Aires Argentina Tel.: +54 11 4813 3330 Email: [email protected] Website: https://robuenosaires.iom.int/ Cover photo: A Syrian family – beneficiaries of the “Syria Programme” – is welcomed by IOM staff at the Ezeiza International Airport in Buenos Aires. © IOM 2018 _____________________________________________ ISBN 978-92-9068-886-0 (PDF) © 2020 International Organization for Migration (IOM) _____________________________________________ All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher. PUB2020/054/EL SOUTH AMERICA REGIONAL STRATEGY 2020–2024 FOREWORD In November 2019, the IOM Strategic Vision was presented to Member States. It reflects the Organization’s view of how it will need to develop over a five-year period, in order to effectively address complex challenges and seize the many opportunities migration offers to both migrants and society. It responds to new and emerging responsibilities – including membership in the United Nations and coordination of the United Nations Network on Migration – as we enter the Decade of Action to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
    [Show full text]
  • A Look at the Texas Hill Country Following the Path We Are on Today Through 2030
    A Look at the Texas Hill Country Following the path we are on today through 2030 This unique and special region will grow, but what will the Hill Country look like in 2030? Growth of the Hill Country The Hill Country Alliance (HCA) is a nonprofit organization whose purpose is to raise public awareness and build community support around the need to preserve the natural resources and heritage of the Central Texas Hill Country. HCA was formed in response to the escalating challenges brought to the Texas Hill Country by rapid development occurring in a sensitive eco-system. Concerned citizens began meeting in September of 2004 to share ideas about strengthening community activism and educating the public about regional planning, conservation development and a more responsible approach growth in the Hill Country. This report was prepared for the Texas Hill Country Alliance by Pegasus Planning 2 Growth of the Hill Country 3 Growth of the Hill Country Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction The Hill Country Today The Hill Country in 2030 Strategic Considerations Reference Land Development and Provision of Utilities in Texas (a primer) Organizational Resources Materials Reviewed During Project End Notes Methodology The HCA wishes to thank members of its board and review team for assistance with this project, and the authors and contributors to the many documents and studies that were reviewed. September 2008 4 Growth of the Hill Country The Setting The population of the 17-County Hill Country region grew from approximately 800,000 in 1950 (after the last drought on record) to 2.6 million in 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit Era
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 151-168 The sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit era Maria Mut Bosque School of Law, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Spain MINECO DER 2017-86138, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Digital Transformation, Spain Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, UK [email protected] (corresponding author) Abstract: This paper focuses on an analysis of the sovereignty of two territorial entities that have unique relations with the United Kingdom: the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories (BOTs). Each of these entities includes very different territories, with different legal statuses and varying forms of self-administration and constitutional linkages with the UK. However, they also share similarities and challenges that enable an analysis of these territories as a complete set. The incomplete sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and BOTs has entailed that all these territories (except Gibraltar) have not been allowed to participate in the 2016 Brexit referendum or in the withdrawal negotiations with the EU. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that Brexit is not an exceptional situation. In the future there will be more and more relevant international issues for these territories which will remain outside of their direct control, but will have a direct impact on them. Thus, if no adjustments are made to their statuses, these territories will have to keep trusting that the UK will be able to represent their interests at the same level as its own interests. Keywords: Brexit, British Overseas Territories (BOTs), constitutional status, Crown Dependencies, sovereignty https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.114 • Received June 2019, accepted March 2020 © 2020—Institute of Island Studies, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous Peoples in Latin America: Statistical Information
    Indigenous Peoples in Latin America: Statistical Information Updated August 5, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46225 SUMMARY R46225 Indigenous Peoples in Latin America: Statistical August 5, 2021 Information Carla Y. Davis-Castro This report provides statistical information on Indigenous peoples in Latin America. Data and Research Librarian findings vary, sometimes greatly, on all topics covered in this report, including populations and languages, socioeconomic data, land and natural resources, human rights and international legal conventions. For example the figure below shows four estimates for the Indigenous population of Latin America ranging from 41.8 million to 53.4 million. The statistics vary depending on the source methodology, changes in national censuses, the number of countries covered, and the years examined. Indigenous Population and Percentage of General Population of Latin America Sources: Graphic created by CRS using the World Bank’s LAC Equity Lab with webpage last updated in July 2021; ECLAC and FILAC’s 2020 Los pueblos indígenas de América Latina - Abya Yala y la Agenda 2030 para el Desarrollo Sostenible: tensiones y desafíos desde una perspectiva territorial; the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and World Bank’s (WB) 2015 Indigenous Latin America in the twenty-first century: the first decade; and ECLAC’s 2014 Guaranteeing Indigenous people’s rights in Latin America: Progress in the past decade and remaining challenges. Notes: The World Bank’s LAC Equity Lab
    [Show full text]
  • Arrangement Between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the States of Guernsey (The
    ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE STATES OF GUERNSEY (THE GOVERNMENT OF GUERNSEY) CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF THE UNITED KINGDOM-CROWN DEPENDENCIES CUSTOMS UNION The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of Guernsey (together “the Governments”), ACKNOWLEDGING that the United Kingdom continues to be responsible for the international relations of Guernsey in international law and that this Arrangement cannot therefore create obligations which are binding under international law and is not intended to alter or affect the constitutional relationship between Guernsey and the United Kingdom, DESIRING to enter into a customs union covering all trade in goods involving the elimination between its members of customs duty on imports and exports and of any charges having equivalent effect, and the adoption of a common customs tariff in their relations with third countries, ACKNOWLEDGING that this Arrangement is without prejudice to the imposition of import value added tax (hereinafter referred to as “import VAT”) or excise duty, or any charges having equivalent effect to import VAT or excise duty, on goods imported into the United Kingdom from Guernsey or into Guernsey from the United Kingdom, RECOGNISING the importance of delivering a safe and fiscally secure customs regime, RECOGNISING the importance of cooperation in delivering such a regime, HAVE DECIDED as follows: PARAGRAPH 1 Object 1. This Arrangement concerns the establishment and operation of the United Kingdom- Crown Dependencies Customs Union (hereinafter referred to as “the Customs Union”), the members of which are the United Kingdom, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man.
    [Show full text]
  • H 955 Great Britain
    Great Britain H 955 BACKGROUND: The heading Great Britain is used in both descriptive and subject cataloging as the conventional form for the United Kingdom, which comprises England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. This instruction sheet describes the usage of Great Britain, in contrast to England, as a subject heading. It also describes the usage of Great Britain, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales as geographic subdivisions. 1. Great Britain vs. England as a subject heading. In general assign the subject heading Great Britain, with topical and/or form subdivisions, as appropriate, to works about the United Kingdom as a whole. Assign England, with appropriate subdivision(s), to works limited to that country. Exception: Do not use the subdivisions BHistory or BPolitics and government under England. For a work on the history, politics, or government of England, assign the heading Great Britain, subdivided as required for the work. References in the subject authority file reflect this practice. Use the subdivision BForeign relations under England only in the restricted sense described in the scope note under EnglandBForeign relations in the subject authority file. 2. Geographic subdivision. a. Great Britain. Assign Great Britain directly after topics for works that discuss the topic in relation to Great Britain as a whole. Example: Title: History of the British theatre. 650 #0 $a Theater $z Great Britain $x History. b. England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales. Assign England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, or Wales directly after topics for works that limit their discussion to the topic in relation to one of the four constituent countries of Great Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • Country Travel Risk Summaries
    COUNTRY RISK SUMMARIES Powered by FocusPoint International, Inc. Report for Week Ending September 19, 2021 Latest Updates: Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, India, Israel, Mali, Mexico, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Turkey, Ukraine and Yemen. ▪ Afghanistan: On September 14, thousands held a protest in Kandahar during afternoon hours local time to denounce a Taliban decision to evict residents in Firqa area. No further details were immediately available. ▪ Burkina Faso: On September 13, at least four people were killed and several others ijured after suspected Islamist militants ambushed a gendarme patrol escorting mining workers between Sakoani and Matiacoali in Est Region. Several gendarmes were missing following the attack. ▪ Cameroon: On September 14, at least seven soldiers were killed in clashes with separatist fighters in kikaikelaki, Northwest region. Another two soldiers were killed in an ambush in Chounghi on September 11. ▪ India: On September 16, at least six people were killed, including one each in Kendrapara and Subarnapur districts, and around 20,522 others evacuated, while 7,500 houses were damaged across Odisha state over the last three days, due to floods triggered by heavy rainfall. Disaster teams were sent to Balasore, Bhadrak and Kendrapara districts. Further floods were expected along the Mahanadi River and its tributaries. ▪ Israel: On September 13, at least two people were injured after being stabbed near Jerusalem Central Bus Station during afternoon hours local time. No further details were immediately available, but the assailant was shot dead by security forces. ▪ Mali: On September 13, at least five government soldiers and three Islamist militants were killed in clashes near Manidje in Kolongo commune, Macina cercle, Segou region, during morning hours local time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Four Health Systems of the United Kingdom: How Do They Compare?
    The four health systems of the United Kingdom: how do they compare? Gwyn Bevan, Marina Karanikolos, Jo Exley, Ellen Nolte, Sheelah Connolly and Nicholas Mays Source report April 2014 About this research This report is the fourth in a series dating back to 1999 which looks at how the publicly financed health care systems in the four countries of the UK have fared before and after devolution. The report was commissioned jointly by The Health Foundation and the Nuffield Trust. The research team was led by Nicholas Mays at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The research looks at how the four national health systems compare and how they have performed in terms of quality and productivity before and after devolution. The research also examines performance in North East England, which is acknowledged to be the region that is most comparable to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland in terms of socioeconomic and other indicators. This report, along with an accompanying summary report, data appendices, digital outputs and a short report on the history of devolution (to be published later in 2014), are available to download free of charge at www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/compare-uk-health www.health.org.uk/compareUKhealth. Acknowledgements We are grateful: to government statisticians in the four countries for guidance on sources of data, highlighting problems of comparability and for checking the data we have used; for comments on the draft report from anonymous referees and from Vernon Bogdanor, Alec Morton and Laura Schang; and for guidance on national clinical audits from Nick Black and on nursing data from Jim Buchan.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom’S DST, and Supports Findings OFFICE of the UNITED STATES I
    30364 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 107 / Monday, June 7, 2021 / Notices HTSUS subheading Product description 7019.90.50 ................. Glass fibers (including glass wool), nesoi, and articles thereof, nesoi. 7403.29.01 ................. Copper alloys (o/than copper-zinc, copper-tin alloys), unwrought nesoi. 8418.10.00 ................. Combined refrigerator-freezers, fitted with separate external doors, electric or other. 9003.11.00 ................. Frames and mountings, of plastics, for spectacles, goggles or the like. 9005.10.00 ................. Binoculars. 9005.80.40 ................. Optical telescopes, including monoculars. 9005.80.60 ................. Monoculars and astronomical instruments other than binoculars and optical telescopes but not including instruments for radio-astronomy. 9010.60.00 ................. Projection screens. 9012.10.00 ................. Microscopes other than optical microscopes; diffraction apparatus. 9015.40.80 ................. Photogrammetrical surveying instruments and appliances, other than electrical. 9015.80.20 ................. Optical surveying, hydrographic, oceanographic, hydrological, meteorological or geophysical instruments and appliances, nesoi. 9027.50.80 ................. Nonelectrical instruments and apparatus using optical radiations (ultraviolet, visible, infrared), nesoi. [FR Doc. 2021–11856 Filed 6–4–21; 8:45 am] implementation of additional duties on investigations/section-301- BILLING CODE 3290–F1–P products, contact [email protected]. digitalservices-taxes. The report
    [Show full text]
  • For Official Use STD/NAES/TASS/ITS(2003)8
    For Official Use STD/NAES/TASS/ITS(2003)8 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 07-Apr-2003 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________ English - Or. English STATISTICS DIRECTORATE For Official Use STD/NAES/TASS/ITS(2003)8 Cancels & replaces the same document of 03 April 2003 National Accounts and Economic Statistics - International Trade Statistics TOWARDS A CONSISTENT GEO-NOMENCLATURE FOR TRADE -ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION- Paper prepared by Andreas Lindner - OECD 4TH INTERNATINAL TRADE STATISTICS EXPERT MEETING Château de la Muette, Paris 7 April 2003 - 9 April 2003 (morning) Beginning at 10.00 a.m. on the first day Contact: [email protected] English - Or. English JT00142270 Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format STD/NAES/TASS/ITS(2003)8 TOWARDS A CONSISTENT GEO-NOMENCLATURE FOR TRADE -ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION- A. Introduction Users of statistics are sometimes confused by differences in data published for country aggregates by different institutions. These differences may be due to many factors, including a different understanding of geographical groupings. For detailed trade flow data this aspect reveals of a particular importance since merchandise trade is measured by individual country, important trader or not. The Merchandise Trade Task Force has already addressed this issue as well as the Task Force on Statistics of International Trade in Services. To shed more light on different practices, OECD has conducted some investigations and has also had preliminary consultations within the Organisation across Directorates. The results of this preliminary research are summarized in this paper and issues identified requiring further investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • SOUTH AMERICA July/August 2007 GGETTINGETTING SSTARTEDTARTED: Guide
    SOUTH AMERICA July/August 2007 GGETTINGETTING SSTARTEDTARTED: Guide Is It Time for a ® South American Strategy? Localization Outsourcing ® and Export in Brazil Doing Business ® in Argentina The Tricky Business ® of Spanish Translation Training Translators ® in South America 0011 GGuideuide SSoAmerica.inddoAmerica.indd 1 66/27/07/27/07 44:13:40:13:40 PPMM SOUTH AMERICA Guide: GGETTINGETTING SSTARTEDTARTED Getting Started: Have you seen the maps where the Southern Hemisphere is at South America the top? “South-up” maps quite often are — incorrectly — referred to as “upside-down,” and it’s easy to be captivated by them. They Editor-in-Chief, Publisher Donna Parrish remind us in the Northern Hemisphere how region-centric we are. Managing Editor Laurel Wagers In this Guide to South America, we focus on doing business and work in Translation Department Editor Jim Healey South America. Greg Churilov and Florencia Paolillo address common trans- Copy Editor Cecilia Spence News Kendra Gray lation misconceptions in dealing with Spanish in South America. Jorgelina Illustrator Doug Jones Vacchino, Nicolás Bravo and Eugenia Conti describe how South American Production Sandy Compton translators are trained. Charles Campbell looks at companies that have Editorial Board entered the South American market with different degrees of success. Jeff Allen, Julieta Coirini, Teddy Bengtsson recounts setting up a company in Argentina. And Bill Hall, Aki Ito, Nancy A. Locke, Fabiano Cid explores Brazil, both as an outsourcing option and an Ultan Ó Broin, Angelika
    [Show full text]