Archive
India’s and Pakistan’s Strategies in Afghanistan: Implications for the United States and the Region
India’s and Pakistan’s Strategies in Afghanistan: Implications for the United States and the Region
Source: RAND Corporation
India and Pakistan have very different visions for Afghanistan, and they seek to advance highly disparate interests through their respective engagements in the country. Pakistan views Afghanistan primarily as an environment in which to pursue its rivalry with India. India pursues domestic priorities (such as reining in anti-Indian terrorism, accessing Central Asian energy resources, and increasing trade) that require Afghanistan to experience stability and economic growth. Thus, whereas Pakistan seeks to fashion an Afghan state that would detract from regional security, India would enhance Afghanistan’s stability, security, economic growth, and regional integration. Afghanistan would welcome greater involvement from India, though it will need to accommodate the interests of multiple other external powers as well. India has a range of options for engaging Afghanistan, from continuing current activities to increasing economic and commercial ties, deploying forces to protect Indian facilities, continuing or expanding training for Afghan forces, or deploying combat troops for counterterrorism and counterinsurgency missions. To avoid antagonizing Pakistan, India is likely to increase economic and commercial engagement while maintaining, or perhaps augmenting, military training, though it will continue to conduct such training inside India. Increased Indian engagement in Afghanistan, particularly enhanced Indian assistance to Afghan security forces, will advance long-term U.S. objectives in central and south Asia. As the United States prepares to withdraw its combat forces from Afghanistan in 2014, it should therefore encourage India to fill the potential vacuum by adopting an increasingly assertive political, economic, and security strategy that includes increased security assistance.
Social Security in the BRIC Countries
Social Security in the BRIC Countries
Source: IMB Center for the Business of Government
Social security is a well-established part of the societal landscape in traditional westernized countries. There are a variety of approaches, and there are substantial differences between the operation of social security under the predominantly insurance-based (or Bismarckian) systems and the social assistance (Beveridge) systems. But both were developed and matured in the context of the industrialization of societies and both reflect the need to provide social protection in mass-scale workforces. It is recognised that (at least historically) the development of social security was seen as a natural complement to the process of economic development. Indeed, they can effectively be characterized as two sides of the same coin.
But what can we draw from the lessons of history and how much do these lessons apply to countries undergoing the 21st century equivalent of the industrial revolution? The so-called BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) countries are experiencing the same kind of growth and rapid change experienced in western economies almost two centuries ago. Certainly, there are similar demands and pressures to balance economic advancement with social protection for those workers who provide the labour to fuel the economic development.
This report examines the existing nature of social security in the BRIC countries in order to consider the likely trajectory of its future development. The report provides a useful reminder that, whilst the underlying pressures are at least to some extent similar,
the starting places and norms are quite different. Also, the globalised world of the 21st century brings new pressures compared with the conditions that applied in the 19th and 20th centuries.
World Cities Culture Report 2012
World Cities Culture Report 2012 (PDF)
Source: Mayor of London (UK)
The Mayor of London’s World Cities Culture Report 2012 is the biggest international survey of its kind. It has collected an unprecedented amount of data on the scope and impact of the cultural assets and activities that are produced and consumed in 12 major cities:
Berlin
Istanbul
Johannesburg
London
Mumbai
New York
Paris
São Paulo
Shanghai
Singapore
Sydney
Tokyo
Using 60 indicators and reports from each of the participating cities, the World Cities Culture Report 2012 shows that culture is seen as important as finance and trade and sits at the heart of public policy.
World Bank’s Country Strategy for India (2013-16)
World Bank’s Country Strategy for India (2013-16)
Source: World Bank
The World Bank is holding a series of consultations to seek inputs on its proposed Country Program Strategy (CPS) for India for 2013-2016. The CPS is the Bank’s roadmap for engagement in the country over the next four years. Oriented toward results, the CPS aims to support India’s development agenda of faster, sustainable and more inclusive growth as outlined in the government’s upcoming 12th Five Year Plan.
The CPS identifies key areas where the World Bank’s assistance can have the greatest impact on poverty reduction. This, in turn, determines the level and composition of the World Bank Group’s financial, advisory, and technical support to the country over a four-year period.
The CPS is developed in consultation with country authorities, civil society organizations, development partners, the media, the private sector, and other stakeholders. Consultations provide a platform for the World Bank Group to tap into the experience and knowledge of a broad range of stakeholders, and listen to their ideas about how the Bank can work with them to help the country meet its development challenges. Discussions not only cover the country’s long-standing development agenda but also the new challenges thrown up by unprecedented economic growth, and the recent slowdown.
Estimating the Range of Food-Insecure Households in India
Estimating the Range of Food-Insecure Households in India
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service
This study provides a quantitative assessment of food security using a large household-level expenditure survey conducted by the Government of India during 2004/05. The analysis tests the impact of several key assumptions required to estimate actual calories consumed from the expenditure data. The authors found significant differences in the estimates of calories consumed and the number of food-insecure people under alternative plausible assumptions for computing the calorie content of nonprocessed foods, processed foods, and meals eaten outside the household. The measurement errors were largest in accounting for calories consumed by the highest and lowest income households. Overall, the difference between the highest and lowest estimate of the number of people consuming an average of less than 2,100 calories per day was equivalent to about 17 percent of India’s population, or 173 million people in 2004/05. Given the significant measurement error in estimating calories consumed, it is important to consider not only consumption surveys, but also aggregate food availability studies and survey data on anthropometric measures that accompany undernourishment—such as growth stunting—in assessing food insecurity.
Nuclear Notes (Vol. 2, Issue 1)
Nuclear Notes (Vol. 2, Issue 1)
Source: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Nuclear Notesis a biannual publication of the CSIS Project on Nuclear Issues (PONI) featuring innovative thinking by rising experts. Its goal is to advance the public debate about nuclear weapons strategy and policy. PONI welcomes submissions of 1,500–2,000 words on contemporary topics pertaining to nuclear weapons strategy or policy. See the Nuclear Notes page for more information on the publication and submitting an article for future editions.
In this issue, Jonah Friedman reviews Russia’s military modernization. Eli Jacobs considers the paradox of de-escalation. Henry Philippens analyzes the future prospects of de-alerting. Yogesh Joshi and Alankrita Sinha investigate India and ballistic missile interception. Stephanie Spies makes the case for (rhetorically) taking the military option off the table with Iran. And Heather Williams looks at the crises of arms control.
Adult Awareness of Tobacco Advertising, Promotion, and Sponsorship — 14 Countries
Adult Awareness of Tobacco Advertising, Promotion, and Sponsorship — 14 Countries
Source: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (CDC)
According to the 2012 Report of the U.S. Surgeon General, exposure to tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship (TAPS) is associated with the initiation and continuation of smoking among young persons. The World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) requires countries to prohibit all forms of TAPS (2); the United States signed the agreement in 2004, but the action has not yet been ratified. Many countries have adopted partial bans covering direct advertising in traditional media channels; however, few countries have adopted comprehensive bans on all types of direct and indirect marketing. To assess progress toward elimination of TAPS and the level of awareness of TAPS among persons aged ≥15 years, CDC used data from the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) collected in 14 countries during 2008–2010. Awareness of any TAPS ranged from 12.4% in Turkey to 70.4% in the Philippines. In the four countries where awareness of TAPs was ≤15%, three of the countries had comprehensive bans covering all nine channels assessed by GATS, and the fourth country banned seven of the nine channels. In 12 countries, more persons were aware of advertising in stores than advertising via any other channel. Reducing exposure to TAPS is important to prevent initiation of tobacco use by youths and young adults and to help smokers quit.
CRS — U.S. Nuclear Cooperation With India: Issues for Congress
U.S. Nuclear Cooperation With India: Issues for Congress (PDF)
Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)
India, which has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and does not have International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards on all of its nuclear material, exploded a “peaceful” nuclear device in 1974, convincing the world of the need for greater restrictions on nuclear trade. The United States created the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) as a direct response to India’s test, halted nuclear exports to India a few years later, and worked to convince other states to do the same. India tested nuclear weapons again in 1998. However, President Bush announced July 18, 2005, he would “work to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India” and would “also seek agreement from Congress to adjust U.S. laws and policies,” in the context of a broader partnership with India.
U.S. nuclear cooperation with other countries is governed by the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954 (P.L. 95-242). However, P.L. 109-401, which President Bush signed into law on December 18, 2006, allows the President to waive several provisions of the AEA. On September 10, 2008, President Bush submitted to Congress, in addition to other required documents, a written determination that P.L. 109-401’s requirements for U.S. nuclear cooperation with India to proceed had been met. President Bush signed P.L. 110-369, which approved the agreement, into law October 8, 2008. Then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and India’s then-External Affairs Minister Shri Pranab Mukherjee signed the agreement two days later, and it entered into force December 6, 2008. Additionally, the United States and India signed a subsequent arrangement in July 2010 which governs “arrangements and procedures under which” India may reprocess U.S.- origin nuclear fuel in two new national reprocessing facilities, which New Delhi has not yet constructed.
The NSG, at the behest of the Bush Administration, agreed in September 2008 to exempt India from some of its export guidelines. That decision has effectively left decisions regarding nuclear commerce with India almost entirely up to individual governments. Since the NSG decision, India has concluded numerous nuclear cooperation agreements with foreign suppliers. However, U.S. companies have not yet started nuclear trade with India and may be reluctant to do so if New Delhi does not resolve concerns regarding its policies on liability for nuclear reactor operators and suppliers. Taking a step to resolve such concerns, India signed the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage, which has not yet entered into force, October 27, 2010. However, many observers have argued that Indian nuclear liability legislation adopted in August 2010 is inconsistent with the Convention.
The Obama Administration has continued with the Bush Administration’s policy regarding civil nuclear cooperation with India. According to a November 8, 2010, White House fact sheet, the United States “intends to support India’s full membership” in the NSG, as well as other multilateral export control regimes.
Aging in Asia: Findings from New and Emerging Data Initiatives
In Aging in Asia: Findings from New and Emerging Data Initiatives, a new compilation of peer-reviewed papers, researchers discuss emerging data about the various aspects of aging in Asia. The papers were presented at conferences held in Beijing and New Delhi during 2011 as part of a collaborative effort by NAS, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Indian National Science Academy, Indonesian Academy of Sciences, and the Science Council of Japan to prepare for the challenges of population aging.
Limits of the Jugaad Growth Model — No Workaround to Good Governance for India
Limits of the Jugaad Growth Model — No Workaround to Good Governance for India (PDF)
Source: James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy (Rice University)
Indian industry has gained fame in management circles for jugaad, or persevering despite limited resources. This skill has proven particularly important in overcoming inadequate public services. However, the economy appears to have reached the limit of using jugaad in the place of good government, suggesting a lower growth trajectory in the absence of a major improvement in political dynamics.
CRS — U.S. Nuclear Cooperation with India: Issues for Congress
U.S. Nuclear Cooperation with India: Issues for Congress (PDF)
Source: Congressional Research Service (via U.S. Department of State Foreign Press Center)
India, which has not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and does not have International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards on all of its nuclear material, exploded a “peaceful” nuclear device in 1974, convincing the world of the need for greater restrictions on nuclear trade. The United States created the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) as a direct response to India’s test, halted nuclear exports to India a few years later, and worked to convince other states to do the same. India tested nuclear weapons again in 1998. However, President Bush announced July 18, 2005, he would “work to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India” and would “also seek agreement from Congress to adjust U.S. laws and policies,” in the context of a broader partnership with India.
U.S. nuclear cooperation with other countries is governed by the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954 (P.L. 95-242). However, P.L. 109-401, which President Bush signed into law on December 18, 2006, allows the President to waive several provisions of the AEA. On September 10, 2008, President Bush submitted to Congress, in addition to other required documents, a written determination that P.L. 109-401’s requirements for U.S. nuclear cooperation with India to proceed had been met. President Bush signed P.L. 110-369, which approved the agreement, into law October 8, 2008. Then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and India’s then-External Affairs Minister Shri Pranab Mukherjee signed the agreement two days later, and it entered into force December 6, 2008. Additionally, the United States and India signed a subsequent arrangement in July 2010 which governs “arrangements and procedures under which” India may reprocess U.S.- origin nuclear fuel in two new national reprocessing facilities, which New Delhi has not yet constructed.
The NSG, at the behest of the Bush Administration, agreed in September 2008 to exempt India from some of its export guidelines. That decision has effectively left decisions regarding nuclear commerce with India almost entirely up to individual governments. Since the NSG decision, India has concluded numerous nuclear cooperation agreements with foreign suppliers. However, U.S. companies have not yet started nuclear trade with India and may be reluctant to do so if New Delhi does not resolve concerns regarding its policies on liability for nuclear reactor operators and suppliers. Taking a step to resolve such concerns, India signed the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage, which has not yet entered into force, October 27, 2010. However, many observers have argued that Indian nuclear liability legislation adopted in August 2010 is inconsistent with the Convention.
The Obama Administration has continued with the Bush Administration’s policy regarding civil nuclear cooperation with India. According to a November 8, 2010, White House fact sheet, the United States “intends to support India’s full membership” in the NSG, as well as other multilateral export control regimes.
Country Analysis Brief: India
Country Analysis Brief: India
Source: Energy Information Administration
In 2009, India was the fourth largest energy consumer in the world, after the United States, China, and Russia. Despite a slowing global economy, India’s energy demand continues to rise. As vehicle ownership expands, petroleum demand in the transport sector is expected to grow in the coming years. While India’s domestic energy resource base is substantial, the country relies on imports for a considerable amount of its energy use.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), hydrocarbons account for the majority of India’s energy use. Together, coal and oil represent about two-thirds of total energy use. Natural gas now accounts for a seven percent share, which is expected to grow with the discovery of new gas deposits.Combustible renewables and waste constitute about one forth of Indian energy use. This share includes traditional biomass sources such as firewood and dengue, which are used by more than 800 million Indian households for cooking. Other renewables such as wind, geothermal, solar, and hydroelectricity represent a 2 percent share of the Indian fuel mix. Nuclear holds a one percent share.
.gif)
India’s Contemporary Security Challenges
India’s Contemporary Security Challenges (PDF)
Source: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
India is the world’s largest democracy, and one of its fastest-growing economies. The country is celebrated for its educated professional class, its urban-based prosperity, and its Bollywood-fueled cultural influence abroad. Commentators wax effusive about its extraordinary “growth story” and rising global clout. A 2010 joint study by the U.S. National Intelligence Council and the European Union declared it the world’s third-most powerful nation.
India, to borrow a government slogan first coined in 2003, is indeed “shining.” This cheery narrative, however, masks a parallel reality about India. While parts of the country bask in the glow of new-found affluence, others continue to toil in the gloom of abject poverty. This other side of India is also riven by violence and unrest, which increasingly targets the government. Meanwhile, even as India takes on the trappings of a global power, it remains deeply concerned about security developments beyond its borders. Lurking beneath India’s recent triumphs are internal and external security challenges that may well intensify in the years ahead.
UK creative industries in India: a guide to architecture, design and digital content
UK creative industries in India: a guide to architecture, design and digital content
Source: Department for Business Innovation & Skills
India offers a great opportunity for UK architecture, design and digital content firms – both as a location for production and as a market for goods and services. This guide is a short introduction for those who have had no dealings with India thus far but wish to learn more, or for those who are already engaged with the market and wish to consolidate and expand their presence further.
The guide is based on insights kindly shared by UK firms already building business in India and their Indian counterparts.
CRS — Rising Economic Powers and the Global Economy: Trends and Issues for Congress
Rising Economic Powers and the Global Economy: Trends and Issues for Congress (PDF)
Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)
A small group of developing countries are transforming the global economic landscape. Led by China, India, and Brazil, these rising economic powers pose varied challenges and opportunities for U.S. economic interests and leadership of the global economy. They also raise significant policy issues for Congress, including the future direction of U.S. trade policy and negotiations, as well as for the multilateral economic institutions that have historically served as the foundation of an open and rules-based global economy.
This report addresses ongoing shifts in global trade and finance and projected future trends resulting from the emergence of these economies. It is the first of a three-part CRS series that focuses on how the Rising Economic Powers are affecting U.S. interests and raising challenges for congressional oversight of U.S. international trade and financial policies.
The major trends in the global economy identified and discussed in this report are:
- The balance of global economic power is shifting from the United States and Europe to a number of fast-growing and large developing countries. These economies account for rising shares of global GDP, manufacturing, and trade, including a significant expansion of trade among the developing countries (South-South trade). These shifts are driven by growing economic integration and interdependence among economies, particularly through new global production and supply chains that incorporate inputs from many different countries.
- Rising economic powers are becoming more important players in international finance. They have increased holdings of foreign exchange reserves, established sovereign wealth funds, borrowed capital from international capital markets, and attracted substantial foreign investment. Their multinational corporations, many state-owned, are investing assets globally and are competing with U.S. firms for natural resources and access to other developing-country markets.
- The long-standing distinction between advanced and developing countries, particularly for rising economic powers, is blurring. The advanced countries may still be the richest countries in terms of per capita income, but their economies may no longer be the largest, the fastest-growing, or the most dynamic. Rising economic powers are exerting greater influence in global trade and financial policies and in the multilateral institutions that have underpinned the global economy since World War II. These developments, in turn, have implications for U.S. global leadership that are subject to debate.
- While the impact of the rising economic powers is considered by most economists to be strongly positive for the U.S. economy overall, not all groups of Americans have benefitted equally. Highly educated workers are seen gaining more job opportunities and higher wages than workers with less education.
Issues for Congress on the international trade and finance policies raised by the changing global landscape could include:
- Seizing full advantage of growing markets for U.S. manufacturers, service providers, agricultural producers, and their workers, including preparing for increased competition.
- The future direction of U.S. trade negotiations and the global trading system, as well as specific policies and issues raised by the global economy. These might include the increasing role of state-owned enterprises, access to developing country markets for services and government procurement, the future role of the dollar as the primary reserve currency, and U.S. participation in global supply chains, among other issues.
- The evolution of international frameworks for financial integration, as well as multilateral and bilateral frameworks for foreign direct investment and sovereign wealth funds.
This report will be updated as events warrant.
CRS — India: Domestic Issues, Strategic Dynamics, and U.S. Relations
India: Domestic Issues, Strategic Dynamics, and U.S. Relations (PDF)
Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)
South Asia emerged in the 21st century as increasingly vital to core U.S. foreign policy interests. India, the region’s dominant actor with more than one billion citizens, is often characterized as a nascent great power and “indispensable partner” of the United States, one that many analysts view as a potential counterweight to China’s growing clout. Since 2004, Washington and New Delhi have been pursuing a “strategic partnership” based on shared values and apparently convergent geopolitical interests. Numerous economic, security, and global initiatives, including plans for civilian nuclear cooperation, are underway. This latter initiative—first launched in 2005 and codified in U.S. law in 2008—reversed three decades of U.S. nonproliferation policy, but has not been implemented to date. Also in 2005, the United States and India signed a ten-year defense framework agreement to expanding bilateral security cooperation. The two countries now engage in numerous and unprecedented combined military exercises, and major U.S. arms sales to India are underway. The value of all bilateral trade tripled from 2004 to 2008 and continues to grow; significant two-way investment also flourishes. The influence of a large, relatively wealthy, and increasingly influential Indian-American community is reflected in Congress’s largest country- specific caucus. More than 100,000 Indian students are attending American universities.
Further U.S. attention on South Asia focuses on ongoing, historically rooted tensions between India and Pakistan. In the interests of regional stability, in particular as a means of facilitating U.S.-led efforts to stabilize nearby Afghanistan, the United States strongly endorses an existing, but largely moribund India-Pakistan peace initiative, and remains concerned about the potential for conflict over Kashmiri sovereignty to cause open hostilities between these two nuclear-armed countries. The United States also seeks to curtail the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missiles in South Asia.
President Barack Obama’s Administration has sought to build upon the deepened U.S. engagement with India begun by President Bill Clinton in 2000 and expanded upon during much of the past decade under President G.W. Bush. This “U.S.-India 3.0” diplomacy was most recently on display in July 2011, when the second U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue session saw a large delegation of senior U.S. officials visit New Delhi to discuss a broad range of global and bilateral issues. Many analysts view the U.S.-India relationship as being among the world’s most important in coming decades and see potentially large benefits to be accrued through engagement on many convergent interests. Bilateral initiatives are underway in all areas, although independent analysts in both countries worry that the partnership has lost momentum in recent years. Outstanding areas of bilateral friction include obstacles to bilateral trade and investment, including in the high-technology sector; outsourcing; the status of conflict in Afghanistan; climate change; and stalled efforts to initiate civil nuclear cooperation.
India is the world’s most populous democracy and remains firmly committed to representative government and rule of law. Its left-leaning Congress Party-led ruling national coalition has been in power for more than seven years under the leadership of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, an Oxford-trained economist. New Delhi’s engagement with regional and other states is extensive and reflects its rising geopolitical status. The national economy has been growing rapidly— India’s is projected to be the world’s third-largest economy in the foreseeable future—yet poor infrastructure, booming energy demand, and restrictive trade and investment practices are seen to hamper full economic potential. Despite the growth of a large urban middle-class, India’s remains a largely rural and agriculture-based society, and is home to some 500-600 million people living in poverty. This report will be updated periodically.
CRS — U.S. Nuclear Cooperation with India: Issues for Congress
U.S. Nuclear Cooperation with India: Issues for Congress (PDF)
Source: Congressional Research Service (via U.S. Department of State Foreign Press Center)
In order for the United States to engage in civilian nuclear cooperation with other states, it must conclude a framework agreement that meets specific requirements under section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA). The AEA also provides for exemptions to these requirements, export control licensing procedures, and criteria for terminating cooperation. Congressional review is required for section 123 agreements; the AEA establishes special parliamentary procedures by which Congress may act on a proposed agreement.
China May Have Technological, Economic Edge Over India in 2025, but Also Demographic Disadvantage
China May Have Technological, Economic Edge Over India in 2025, but Also Demographic Disadvantage
Source: RAND Corporation
As India and China continue to grow in prominence, each nation has certain advantages, but neither one is primed to have clear across-the-board competitive advantages over the other, according to a new analysis by RAND Corporation researchers.
While India’s prime working-age population will overtake that of China in 2028, China has advantages in science and technology, as well as in developing its national defense capabilities, according to the report.
But India’s more open and flexible political structure may allow it to move nimbly in making adjustments to its policies and thereby improve its relative performance, perhaps providing it with an advantage over China.
…
The RAND study assesses the relative attainment and prospects of China and India through 2025 in four areas: demography, macroeconomics, science and technology, and defense spending and procurement. Researchers say understanding the nations’ relative standing on these issues will have an effect on potential cooperation and competition between the two countries, and may assist policymakers in other countries in developing policies toward the two nations.China and India have the world’s largest populations, with India’s rate of population growth about twice that of China’s. India’s total population will equal China’s in 2025—each will have an estimated 1.4 billion people—and is expected to exceed China’s population thereafter. In addition, India’s prime working-age population will overtake China’s in 2028.
While the Chinese public is aging faster than in India, China’s population is healthier, has access to a better-developed health care system, and has higher levels of literacy and education, according to the study. Both countries have gender imbalances caused by historical preferences for males, which could generate social pressures resulting from having populations with significantly more men than women in certain parts of the two countries.
The growth rate of the gross domestic product in each of the nations from 2020 to 2025 is expected to be about the same—5.7 percent in China and 5.6 percent in India. China’s current overall GDP is about three times larger than India’s, and by 2025 the difference between their two GDPs is estimated to be $4.4 trillion annually.
Focus: Rise of emerging markets in energy: How China and other BRIC nations are changing the game
Focus: Rise of emerging markets in energy: How China and other BRIC nations are changing the game
Source: Deloitte
The global economy is undergoing a paradigm shift, from a Western-dominated economic model to one that is more complex and perhaps multi-polar. The centers of consumption, production, and innovation are no longer concentrated solely in Western economies but are shifting to Asia, specifically China and India, as well as other emerging economies such as Brazil and Russia.
Deloitte’s global Energy & Resources industry group and Deloitte China hosted the inaugural Asia Pacific Natural Resources Forum in Beijing, China on 13 July 2011. This one-day event was focused on China’s globalization of its natural resources sector, which includes Oil & Gas, Mining, Shipping, and Power & Utilities.
Explore this collection of reports to learn more about how China and other emerging nations like Brazil, Russia, and India are impacting the future of energy across the world. Contact us to to learn more about Deloitte’s global Energy & Resources industry group.
Crimes against international students in Australia: 2005–09
Crimes against international students in Australia: 2005–09
Source: Australian Institute of Criminology
A key part of the Australian Institute of Criminology’s role is to provide a capacity to investigate new and evolving crimes and in the past two years, there has been significant interest in determining the nature and extent to which international students studying in Australia are victims of crime.
Detailed findings are provided from what is the most comprehensive student victimisation study ever conducted in Australia, based on an analysis of Department of Immigration and Citizenship international student visa records for more than 400,000 students matched with police crime victimisation records. In addition, supplementary analysis of the AIC’s National Homicide Monitoring Program (NHMP) database, as well as the Australian component of the 2004 International Crime Victimisation Survey (ICVS), are used to provide additional context to the AIC’s investigation.
Primarily, this research was designed to provide the best available estimation of the extent to which international students have been the victims of crime during their time in Australia and to determine whether international students are more or less likely than an Australian comparison population to have experienced crime.
This report provides the best available estimation of the extent to which international students have been the victims of crime during their time in Australia and has enabled the rate of recorded crimes experienced by international students from the five largest source countries (People’s Republic of China, India, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea (South Korea) and the United States) to be compared with the rate for Australian reference populations. While this research has not answered the question of whether attacks against overseas students are racially motivated, the findings from this research do point to other factors such as employment and the use of public transport, that influence the risk or likelihood of overseas students experiencing crime. This provides direction for crime prevention efforts to reduce the risk of crime for this population.
This report represents the culmination of the AIC’s research into crimes against international students.
