Example collocations logo

Global in sentence

23561 examples of Global in a sentence

The Nobel Prize-winning global scientific process called the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has set the gold standard for scientific rigor in analyzing the threats of human-induced climate change.
Recent survey data by the Pew Foundation found that while 58% of Democrats believe that human beings are causing global warming, only 28% of Republicans do.
Humanity’s only hope is that the vicious circle of extremism can be replaced by a shared global understanding of the massive challenges of climate change, food supplies, sustainable energy, water scarcity, and poverty.
Global scientific processes like the IPCC are critical, because they offer our best hope of forging a consensus based on the scientific evidence.
The US must return to the global consensus based on shared science rather than anti-intellectualism.
Experimental ChinaHONG KONG – Five years ago, few would have expected that China would produce four of the top ten global Internet companies (by number of visitors) – Alibaba, Baidu, Tencent, and Sohu – as well as innovative multinationals like Huawei and Xiaomi.
Nor would most have anticipated China’s increasing provision of global public goods, including its “one belt, one road” strategy, which aims to provide the infrastructure needed to knit Eurasia into a single vast market.
For example, the networking of telecommunications, roads, rail, air, and maritime transport enabled China to become a global hub for the production of consumer durables, and improve their distribution.
Similarly, from a global perspective, opening trade can contribute to the world’s overall economic growth, but does not guarantee that the benefits will be fairly distributed among countries.
Still, the uneven distribution of the benefits created by a global trade opening means that some countries, especially the least developed, gain little in comparative terms, and are possibly even hurt.
This explains growing concern about the role of trade in development, despite the obvious fact that increased global trade has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in recent decades.
For example, one of the critical issues blocking progress on the World Trade Organization’s Doha Development Agenda of global free-trade talks centers on the extent to which major developing countries should open their markets.
A better method of seeking balance is to give developing countries greater access to global markets, including those of other developing countries.
And, for developing countries that lack supply-side capacity, greater access to the global market is a moot point, as they remain far from even considering what size their share of it should be.
By contrast, if developing countries cut their tariffs by the same proportion as high-income countries, and services and investment were also liberalized, the global annual gains could climb as high as US$120 billion, with US$17 billion going to the world’s poorest countries.
Recast as after calculating the net present value of the stream of future benefits, a realistic Doha outcome could increase global income by more than $3000 billion per year, $2500 billion of which would go to the developing world.
An “alternative” to Doha, whereby other high-income countries would follow the European Union’s offer of duty-free access to products from Least-Developed Countries (LDCs) and African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) small countries, would involve only a tiny fraction of global gains from trade reform.
The global net benefit of the increased flow of migrants for 25 years is between $13 trillion and $39 trillion – close to the median estimated gains from the Doha round.
For outsiders, the reform process also poses risks that extend well beyond the global economic fallout of a sharp Chinese slowdown.
In addition, the absence of an IMF insurance facility with acceptable terms has been a major gap in the global financial architecture, especially for the more dynamic emerging-market economies.
Emerging markets that approach the IMF early on for pre-crisis financing will find shelter from the winds of global deleveraging, which in turn will help contain the spread of the crisis.
Together, they constitute a turning point in the way the IMF works, and will allow it to serve its global membership even better.
To be sure, slow economic growth in the years since the 2008 global financial crisis has sapped voters’ enthusiasm for traditional parties fighting over the middle ground.
But, as the world economy has become increasingly interconnected, a global property-rights infrastructure (PRI) has emerged – further raising the stakes of developing effective national PRIs and accurate price-discovery mechanisms.
The global PRI has arisen through countries’ widespread accession to the World Trade Organization, international accounting and regulatory criteria like the Basel Accords, standards established by the International Organization of Securities Commissions, and some aspects of international law.
As national economies and multinational companies compete for market share, global standards of market behavior become increasingly important.
Consider the smart-phone industry, in which corporations like Apple, Samsung, Sony, Nokia, and Huawei compete fiercely to secure their global market shares.
Given that companies cannot compete effectively in global markets without a sound domestic PRI, such firm-level competition has driven countries to improve the national PRI over the longer term.
This pattern was evident in the 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis, the 2008 global financial crisis, and the eurozone crisis that erupted in 2010.
In this environment, it may be appropriate to strengthen the global PRI further.
BackNext