Example collocations logo

Structural in sentence

2531 examples of Structural in a sentence

On a positive note, the Decade of Roma Inclusion, established in 2005, is receiving strong support from the structural funds administered by the European Commission and is making some inroads.
And the IMF did impose conditions on its loans to Greece – including fiscal austerity, privatization, and structural reform of its pension and tax systems – most of which were necessary to address the country’s insolvency.
Structural reforms, including the immediate closing of financial institutions and the elimination of non-performing loans, also helped to bolster recovery.
The global economic crisis has merely helped to mask chronic structural imbalances within the region.
With European leaders wedded to austerity and moving at a glacial pace to address the structural problems stemming from the eurozone’s flawed institutional design, it is no wonder that the continent’s prospects appear so bleak.
Given the fundamental challenges to society posed by the free flow of goods, services, and capital – and compounded by rapid technological progress, most immediately in robotics – structural reforms must also be undertaken.
And without structural reform, there is little chance that the Greek economy will see sustained stability and growth – not least because official lenders are unwilling to continue extending an unreformed Greece significantly more money than it is asked to pay.
To be sure, structural reforms often favor policies like labor-market flexibility.
Recently, opponents of structural reform have put forward more exotic objections – most notably the problem caused by deflation when policy interest rates are at zero.
If structural reforms simply lower all wages and prices, it may indeed be difficult in the short-term to counter the drop in aggregate demand.
In cases like Greece, the creditors’ passion for structural reforms might be better directed at home – particularly toward improving financial regulation.
In Shanghai, the G-20 foreign ministers committed to use all available tools – structural, monetary, and fiscal – to boost growth rates and prevent deflation.
Indeed, some structural reforms, such as increasing labor-market flexibility (by, say, making it easier to dismiss workers), can initially have a negative effect on consumer confidence and spending.
One thing is certain: Relying on structural reform, on purely monetary policies, or on the fiscal policies available to governments that believe that all deficits must be financed with debt will not reverse the world’s chronic deficiency of nominal demand.
In a similar spirit, development economics should be built on inquiries into the nature and causes of modern economic growth – that is, on structural change in the process of economic development.
Development thinking so far has focused on what developing countries do not have (developed countries’ capital-intensive industries); on areas in which developed countries perform better (Washington Consensus policies and governance); or on areas that are important from a humanitarian point of view but do not directly contribute to structural change (health and education).
With dynamic structural change starting from there, success will breed success.
Structural change is, by definition, innovative.
Developing countries may benefit from the advantage of backwardness by replicating the structural change that has already occurred in higher-income countries.
The key is to have the right policy framework in place to facilitate private-sector alignment with the country’s comparative advantages, and to benefit from latecomer advantages in the process of structural change.
Many now believe that the recent broad-based growth slowdown in emerging economies is not cyclical, but a reflection of underlying structural flaws.
Indeed, emerging countries have largely recognized the need for a comprehensive strategy, comprising targeted policies and deep structural reforms, to develop new sources of growth.
Only by recognizing the weaknesses of old growth patterns and pursuing the needed structural reforms can emerging economies achieve strong, stable, and sustainable GDP growth – and fulfill their potential as the global economy’s main engines.
They will have to brace themselves for an extensive period of diminished expectations that will last much longer than the next economic boom, and that will require substantial structural changes in the US economy.
At the recent G20 summit in Hangzhou, China, world leaders emphasized the need to boost investment and accelerate structural reforms to enhance productivity and lift potential growth.
Less wealthy member countries benefited from tools like the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, which provided considerable resources to enable them to boost their per capita income.
The process has been driven by a combination of secular and structural issues – including the changing nature of technological advancement, the rise of “winner-take-all” investment characteristics, and political systems favoring the wealthy – and has been turbocharged by cyclical forces.
Today’s high levels of inequality also impede the structural reforms needed to boost productivity, while undermining efforts to address residual pockets of excessive indebtedness.
So was the international community’s sigh of relief after the latest financial rescue – additional money from Greece’s creditors in exchange for structural reforms – premature?
But discussions of the Chinese economy’s imbalances and vulnerabilities tend to neglect some of the more positive elements of its structural evolution, particularly the government’s track record of prompt corrective intervention, and the substantial state balance sheet that can be deployed, if necessary.
BackNext