Connect with us

Business and Finance

Ghana wants to limit the import of 22 products – an economist explains how, why and what else needs to be done

Published

on

What are the import restrictions?

These refer to the various programs, mechanisms and regulations that the government can impose to restrict or limit the import of goods and services. They are available various forms.

Tariffs: These are taxes levied on imported goods and services. These can be specific taxes (fixed amount per unit) or ad valorem (percentage of value) or each.

Amounts: This means a direct limit on the amount of a specific good that may be imported at a given time. This is enforced by issuing licenses to individuals or firms.

Embargo and sanctions: This involves a ban on the import of a particular good. Importing prohibited goods is unlawful.

Quality standards and technical barriers: A rustic can set stringent requirements that imported goods must meet.

Local content requirements: According to this regulation, a certain proportion of the final good must be produced in the country, either in physical units or in terms of value.

The selection of a particular form of import restriction depends upon the geopolitical, economic and social characteristics of the country.

What role does it play as an economic strategy?

Protection of domestic and emerging industries: Restrictions similar to tariffs and quotas can raise the price of imported goods and increase the price of domestic goods competitive. This can stimulate local producers to produce more, grow and develop.

Revenue for the government: Import restrictions, similar to tariffs, are a source of government revenue.

Balance of payments and trade deficit management: Import restrictions help correct and may reduce balance of payments problems trade deficits. This might help countries achieve this economic profits needed for long-term growth and development.

Environmental and health considerations: These restrictions can also help solve the problem environmental and health concerns.

However, excessive import restrictions may backfire if foreign countries retaliate.

Why is Ghana considering import restrictions?

There were many reasons for this.

Health concerns: Concerns have been raised regarding quality some imported food and pharmaceutical products.

Protection of domestic and emerging industries: Cheap imports lead to collapse domestic firms. They are suffering high loan costs and the erosion of capital due to inflation. The government can protect them by placing restrictions on some of these low-cost imports. This will make them competitive and save currency exchange.

Support the trade deficit and balance of payments: These restrictions will reduce imports. All else being equal, they are going to improve the country’s trade balance and balance of payments. The government can have sufficient foreign exchange reserves and will be able to finance its development program.

Revenue for the government: One from the International Monetary Fund conditions financial assistance to Ghana is that the government must increase tax revenues. It can do that through tariffs.

Stabilize the currency: These restrictions will reduce the amount of foreign currency utilized in imports. This increases the supply of the Forex market and helps stabilize the currency.

Have other African countries done this?

The East African Community, covering Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, Uganda, South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, is subject to quite a few import restrictions. These countries share a typical external customs tariff on the cost, insurance and freight value of imports. They also ban certain goods similar to certain pharmaceuticals, narcotic drugs, firearms and ammunition, explosives, pornography, genetically modified products and plastic bags.

South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland and Namibia inside Southern African Customs Union it also administers a typical external tariff on imports from other countries. They ban or impose quotas on certain goods, similar to drugs and addictive drugs.

Nigeria has its own limitations on some products. These include rice, pork, beef, live or dead birds including frozen poultry, cocoa butter, spaghetti and some pharmaceuticals.

What is the way forward?

In addition to import restrictions, the following recommendations may help Ghana.

Diversification of the economy: Ghana must support industries beyond traditional sectors similar to agriculture and mining. Investments in technology, innovation and value-added production might help make the economy more resilient.

Investments in education and skills development: This may include investing in science, technology, engineering and mathematics education to meet the demands of a contemporary and diverse economy.

Development of infrastructure: Invest in critical infrastructure similar to roads, ports and energy to reduce transport costs, improve connectivity and attract investment.

Promotion of export-oriented industries: By specializing in products and services which can be in demand in the international market, Ghana can increase its export earnings and improve its trade balance.

Trade facilitation and ease of doing business: Simplifying business processes and making it easier to do business. Streamlining customs procedures, reducing bureaucratic hurdles and improving the overall business environment can attract investment and promote economic growth.

Increased agricultural productivity: Invest in research and development. Promote sustainable agricultural practices, introduce modern technologies and improve farmers’ access to markets.

Reducing corruption: A great governance environment can attract investment and construct trust in the business community.

Continuous policy review: Economic policy must adapt to changing circumstances. Flexibility and the ability to respond to economic conditions are crucial for effective management.

Many countries adopted inward-looking or import substitution strategies in the early stages of their development. The key query is how much to produce to meet demand and at what quality. All stakeholders must ensure production meets demand while ensuring quality.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business and Finance

We analyzed 19,898 Kickstarter campaigns and found that talking about politics hurts fundraising

Published

on

By

Divisive political beliefs are in all places lately, but entrepreneurs can be smart to bite their tongue.

In recent evaluation of 19,898 Kickstarter campaignswe found that start-up corporations expressing political beliefs attracted less funding than those that remained apolitical.

How professors Who test enterprisewe wanted to know the connection between political expression and crowdfunding success. So we checked out hundreds of campaigns launched over two years.

We searched the campaigns for subtle expressions of conservative values ​​- “We continue to remember that all lives matter, regardless of skin color or religion, and we hope I have clarified my idea of ​​a sandwich shop,” to call only one example – and more overt ones reminiscent of like “Drain the Swamp and Defend MAGA Country.

We did the identical with subtle liberal perspectives – like “I’m fed up and annoyed with the lack of equality and diversity in the media” – and overt ones like “I believe that art matters + and magic is real. Also: Black Lives Matter.”

Ultimately, we found that each percentage point increase in political speeches was related to a 9% decline in fundraising for conservatives and a 17% decline for liberals.

Our theory, which our findings support, is that people don’t expect someone to share political views in a business context. When entrepreneurs violate these expectations, people perceive them as unprofessional, which ultimately hurts their crowdfunding performance.

Reaction to political speech doesn’t appear to affect everyone equally. Third party endorsement campaigns reminiscent of “A design we loveBadge, we discovered, were less punished. Placing photos or videos on the campaign page also appears to scale back the negative effect. The entrepreneur’s previous successful experiences proved successful in leaning toward a conservative but not liberal voice.

Why it matters

How entrepreneurs develop into more and more talk about politicsthey need to understand the potential costs of speaking authentically. Our research shows that funders expect entrepreneurs to be apolitical in crowdfunding and penalize those that express their political values. While we looked specifically at Kickstarter campaigns, the implications for existing corporations that are also in search of investment are obvious.

To be fair, our work also found evidence that entrepreneurs who appear more credible – for instance, through third-party support or use of multimedia – are less more likely to be penalized for political speech. Overall, nonetheless, entrepreneurs should at the very least consider remaining silent on political issues of their financial offers to make sure that they don’t harm their possibilities.

What continues to be unknown

Although we focused on the impact of entrepreneurs’ political speeches, a natural follow-up query is whether or not donors’ political beliefs influence whether or not they put money into a project. Researchers know that conservatives and liberals approach decision-making completely different. Therefore, we consider it’s critical that researchers address this query next. This variety of research will begin to offer a more holistic picture of how political views influence crowdfunding.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading

Business and Finance

Companies continue to sell harmful products, but history shows that in the end, consumers can win

Published

on

By

In 2023 42 state attorneys general sued Meta to remove Instagram features that Meta’s own research showed this – as confirmed by independent research – are harmful to teenage girls.

That same yr, a report by the nonprofit Sandy Hook Promise found that gun manufacturers did targeted at the youth market with eye-catching promoting and product placement in video games.

And in the period preceding the Olympic Games in Paris the leading international health journal urged the International Olympic Committee to end its relationship with Coca-Cola due to increased obesity, diabetes, heart disease and hypertension related to the consumption of sugary drinks.

Social media, guns, sugar: these are all examples of what we call “market-driven epidemics.”

When people take into consideration epidemics, they might think that they’re only brought on by viruses or other germs. But as public health expertswe all know this is just a part of the story. Trade can also cause epidemics. That’s why our team coined this phrase in a recent study, since you can’t solve an issue without naming it.

A 1946 commercial suggests that doctors endorse Camel cigarettes.
Apic/Getty Images

Market-driven epidemics follow a well-recognized scenario. First, firms start selling a sexy, often addictive product. As increasingly people start using it, the health damage becomes increasingly clear. But whilst evidence of harm increases and fatalities multiply, sales continue to soar as firms resist efforts by public health authorities, consumer groups and others to police them.

We see this pattern across many products, including social media platforms, firearms, sugar-sweetened beverages, ultra-processed foods, opioids, nicotine products, infant formula, and alcohol. Collectively, their damage contributes to over 1 million people die yearly in the US.

How to fight the trade epidemic

In our study, we asked two key questions: Can such epidemics be combated by changing the consumption patterns of hundreds of thousands of individuals? And in that case, what is required?

We found the answers by many years of efforts to reduce unhealthy consumption of three products: cigarettes, sugar and prescription opioids.

In each case, Americans consumed increasingly of those foods, even in the face of mounting health problems, until a tipping point was reached. Thereafter, there was a gradual decline in consumption.

The immediate reason behind each tipping point varied greatly. On cigarettes, he was the trusted, authoritative voice of the Surgeon General of the United States He stated unequivocally in 1964 that smoking causes cancer.

In the case of sugar, one in every of the key moments was the famous petition from 1999 entitled “America: Drowning in sugar” submitted by the Center for Science in the Public Interest and supported by 72 leading public health organizations and experts. The petition called on the Food and Drug Administration to require food labels to include the variety of added sugars and their percentage of the really helpful day by day intake.

Once in force, the policy helped consumers make healthier food decisions while highlighting what number of products on the market contain sugar.

However, in the case of prescription opioids in 2011, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared an opioid epidemicsignaling to doctors that they were overprescribing and to the pharmaceutical industry that they were being irresponsible.

In each case, success got here after years of sustained efforts by scientists, public health officials and advocates to sway public opinion, often against deliberate corporate efforts to undermine them.

Then got here the 1964 report on smoking a decade of confusion that the industry has sown to divert public attention from the scientific consensus on the dangers of tobacco. The report provided conclusive authority that modified the narrative. Almost overnight, smoking ceased to be perceived as a universally accepted social custom and have become a deadly addiction. Today, simply 1 in 9 American adults smokecompared to almost half of all adults in 1954.

Actions taken in 1999 by public health leaders connected the dots between rising obesity rates and sugary foods and beverages. People began to analyze their weight-reduction plan in detail, especially their sugar intake. As a result, annual sugar consumption has since fallen by greater than 15 kilos per person, eliminating half the amount of sugar Americans added to their diets between 1950 and 2000.

The CDC’s report on opioids effectively conveyed to physicians that they can’t simply depend on patients to avoid the misuse of highly addictive drugs, underscoring their responsibility to help control the epidemic by limiting prescription opioids like OxyContin. Since the report, opioids have been prescribed by prescription reduced by 60% – more consistent with actual medical needs.

Learning from the past

While there aren’t any easy solutions to today’s market epidemics, we can learn from history about steps that can effectively reduce the consumption of harmful products.

Changing attitudes towards smoking show that the authoritative voice of presidency can still be extremely useful in combating corporate resistance and the spread of corporate disinformation.

It could also be effective to provide clear guidance on products and their alternatives, as public health leaders have done in recommending that consumers limit their consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages.

What we can learn from opioids is that putting pressure on those making consumption decisions, who are usually not at all times the consumers themselves, can have a profound impact on changing patterns of use.

Despite the progress made on these three issues, the United States continues to grapple with ongoing and emerging unhealthy food epidemics. For example, although smoking has declined dramatically, the shift to vaping and other nicotine-delivering products is creating latest challenges, especially amongst teenagers.

Meanwhile, gun deaths continue to rise, and guns at the moment are the leading cause child killer under 18, and the gun industry continues to oppose public health measures to reduce gun violence.

Currently, ultra-processed food is answerable for this almost 60% diets of the average American, but latest evidence confirms their harmfulness and the food industry defends them.

But our research shows that these problems can be solved – that it’s, in fact, possible to change the behavior of hundreds of thousands of Americans. This is excellent news. This means that solid evidence and public health motion can turn around a few of the world’s biggest health challenges, potentially saving money hundreds of thousands of lives AND billions of dollars in health care costs.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading

Business and Finance

Black billionaire Robert F. Smith buys Smartsheet for $8.4 billion

Published

on

By

Robert Smith, smartsheet


Black billionaire Robert F. Smith, CEO and founding father of Vista Equity Partners, is partnering with Blackstone to accumulate Smartsheet.

Smartsheet is a contemporary enterprise work management platform utilized by corporations around the globe. According to A press releaseroughly 85% of Fortune 500 corporations in 2024 use the Smartsheet platform.

“For over a decade, we have built a thriving community of employees, partners and customers, each focused on building and using Smartsheet’s industry-leading work management platform. The next phase of growth and customer success begins. We look forward to working with Blackstone and Vista Equity Partners to accelerate our vision of modernizing work management in enterprises around the world,” said Mark Mader, CEO of Smartsheet.

Vista is a worldwide investment firm with over $100 billion in assets under management as of March 31, 2024. The firm is thought for investing exclusively in enterprise software, data and technology corporations.

Blackstone is the world’s largest alternative asset manager and strives to deliver attractive returns to institutional and individual investors by strengthening the businesses during which they select to speculate.

“Modern enterprises rely on Smartsheet’s simple and scalable solutions to manage a diverse range of business-critical processes on a daily basis because they enable seamless collaboration, increased productivity, and faster, more informed decision-making” – Monti Saroya, co-head of Vista Flagship Fund, and John Stalder , managing director of Vista, said in a joint statement.

“We look forward to working closely with Blackstone and Smartsheet to support their ambitious goal of making the platform available to every organization, team and employee tasked with collaborating to achieve successful outcomes,” they added.

Who is black billionaire Robert F. Smith?

According to him website, Smith was born to 2 working-class parents in a predominantly black middle-class neighborhood in Denver. Giving back was instilled in him at a young age.

“Every month for over 50 years, he watched as (his parents) donated their limited resources to charities such as the United Negro College Fund (UNCF), regardless of what was going on in their personal lives,” reads a press release on his website website.

It is obvious that higher education was also a priority for Smith. He earned a chemical engineering degree from Cornell University and later attended Columbia’s Business School. After graduating in 1994, he worked in investment banking in mergers and acquisitions at Goldman Sachs in New York and later in San Francisco.

In 2000, Smith founded Vista Equity Partners (Vista), a number one global investment firm. Under his leadership, the corporate’s portfolio includes several of the world’s leading enterprise software corporations.

reports Smith is price $10.8 billion.

Post views: 28


This article was originally published on : www.blackenterprise.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe Us To Receive Our Latest News Directly In Your Inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Trending