The International Economy: Global Markets and Global Finance
The International Economy: Global Markets and Global Finance Mark S. LeClair Fairfield University Description: Globalization has dramatically altered the economies of both industrialized and developing nations. This course will examine the impacts of the internationalization of the world economy, focusing
both on trade and global finance. The 2016 election highlights some of the resistance to the impacts of globalization within the U.S. The stalled World Trade Organization talks are another indicator of pushback against the rapid march towards free and open trade. Global trade imbalances (trade deficits) have now created circumstances in which the global financial structure is under stress, which may lead to significant changes in how trade is financed, which currencies are used, and which countries dominate the world trading system.
Go to www.faculty.fairfield.edu/mleclair Look for link marked Lifelong Learning at top Topics for Six Weeks History of Trade Relations From Protectionism to Globalism -Regionalism (Free Trade Areas) From the EU to NAFTA -The Free Trade Debate Why is Free Trade now Controversial -International Finance The Bretton Woods System and PostWar Economic Relations
-The Currency Problem The Role of the dollar, euro, and other reserve currencies -The Developing Nations in the World Financial System Trade Relations of the U.S. From Protectionism to Globalism Concept of Free Trade is Recent (Post WW2)
Initially, Tariffs were a source of revenue funded the Federal Government Fought War of 1812 on tariff revenues Tariffs began slow drift downwards from 70% average to less than 60% by time of Civil War Major issue between North and South North wanted high tariffs, South wanted cheap goods True tariff reductions finally occur in the 1920s
Average tariff rate drops to 15% Onset of Great Depression U.S. pursued Beggar Thy Neighbor policy Smoot-Hawley Tariffs raised average tariff to 60% Europe Responded in kind international trade dried up Major cause of Great Depression As Depression is winding down (and war starting) U.S.
tentatively begins negotiating reduced tariffs (bilateralism) Process is slow, destined to take decades Instead, U.S. and Allies Move to Multilateralism. 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT System) Was supposed to become part of International Trade Organization, but never supported in Congress
Under GATT, tariff cuts become universal Uniformity of Treatment Even for nations that were not cutting their tariffs Result was rapid and universal unwinding of tariffs Most important notion of GATT was Most Favored Nation (MFN) status Every country (except enemies) received MFN status and
therefor the lower tariffs At the moment, only Cuba and North Korea are w/out MFN status Although invaluable, this aspect of the GATT will turn out to be problematic later on Work of GATT proceeded in Rounds Most important were: The 1947 Round, Kennedy
Round, Tokyo Round, Uruguay Round Currently in the Doha Round, but is moribund During each Round, negotiators representing all members of the GATT would seek give and take on tariffs and other barriers The Kennedy Round (1962-65) U.S. pushed for extensive tariff cuts Fear that the now-forming European Economic Community
(EEC) would destroy the GATT EEC was an open violation of the tenets of the GATT large tariff cuts would help undermine its advantages Kennedy Round secured very large cuts by all participants, and also clarified how nations deal with dumping From U.S. perspective, undercut EEC enough to prevent it from destroying the GATT The Tokyo Round..
Worked on: Nontariff barriers Industrial Standards Hot plate story Sanitary standards Intellectual Property Rights protection A major fail U.S. innovations routinely stolen
Uruguay Round (1994) Addressed major problem with structure of GATT system MFN status allowed developing nations to sit back and take tariff cuts without cutting their own trade barriers Uruguay Round forced their involvement Although tariff rates remain high in developing world, at least they were cut somewhat
Uruguay Round also created the WTO World Trade Organization Much more powerful than GATT Particularly trade dispute powers U.S. was immediately sued over dolphin-safe tuna and lost the case
Environmentalists have been unhappy with the GATT/ WTO for some time, as have labor organizations Helped produce the riots in 1999 in Seattle Finally, the Doha Round (Qatar) The Development Round Focus was on expanding the trade of the developing nations Key to success reduction of agricultural tariffs in the U.S.
and Europe But, tariffs are a result of agricultural subsidies cannot remove them without removing price manipulation in markets For U.S., peanuts, cotton, milk, sugar are major problems (with cotton with have a quota) Failure to solve this issue has stalled round (nations are in the 16th year of negotiations) Other problem is diminishing returns
Average tariffs rates for the U.S., the EU and Japan are about 2% Hard to gather 150 nations together to argue about such low tariff barriers Is the WTO permanently stalled? Remaining Issues may be Politically Unsolvable U.S. tariffs on cotton, sugar, etc. are politically
embedded No way to eliminate Yet, these are exactly the places developing nations in Africa could compete (Mali is a major producer of cotton) U.S. uses its trade preference program to help out some developing nations But, protection of industry still primary goal WTO Will Continue to Act as Trade
Dispute Body Rules on complaints by nations about unfair trade practices e.g. President Bushs imposition of protective tariffs on steel European imposition of tariffs on U.S. agriculture in the 1980s WTO found both practices illegal and enabled the offended nations to impose retaliatory tariffs
As in most cases, original tariffs removed before sanctions imposed Questions? Week 2 - Regionalism In the news during campaign with discussion of TransPacific Partnership (TPP) Regionalism refers to agreements that produce free trade between member states, sometimes at the
expense of non-members Began with Treaty of Rome in 1957 Regionalism a major threat to the GATT at the time Expansion of Free Trade Agreements Central American Common Market (1960) Latin American Free Trade Area (later Latin American Integration Association) Argentina-Brazil FTA
NAFTA (1994) Mercosur (1994) Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Caricom (Caribbean Community) Problem FTAs are at Odds with GATT System GATT/WTO promise that all nations get equal treatment Not possible when some nations are members of an FTA
Had to rewrite GATT rules to allow for E.E.C. Article XXIV permits free trade areas as long as they are trade- creating, not trade-diverting That is, they increase overall trade rather than simply transferring it from a nation that is outside the FTA to one inside Would argue that the EU has been trade-diverting at times, but it has been ignored
Particularly true of the later entrants to the Union Piecemeal formation has made measurement difficult: 1964-8 original five members 1973 UK, Ireland and Denmark 1981 Greece 1986 Spain and Portugal Etc.
Now 28 members (soon to be 27) with deep economic ties, although some deeper than others Stages of Integration Can identify 5 distinct steps in formation of a union such as the EU Free Trade Area All barriers to trade dropped Customs Union Adoption of common external tariffs Common Market Add labor and capital mobility to the
above (labor mobility may be a key sticking point) Common Currency (euro) adopted by 17 countries Political Union European Parliament, European Central Bank, etc. EU has proceeded far beyond all other Unions But, at each stage, there is a loss of autonomy Fractures are now appearing in rush to create a
United States of Europe Failure of 9 countries to adopt the euro Upcoming exit of the UK Failure of the French to pass EU Constitution in 2005 Reversal of rule on labor mobility after admission of Eastern European nations Other Integration Movements Central American Common Market
Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Latin American Integration Association (LAIA) Mercosur (Southern Market) Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Now expanded in Latin America, sort of Most are Free Trade Areas Going back to five stages of integration
Second stage is Customs Union (common external tariffs) NAFTA never got to this stage Certainly no interest in free labor mobility (stage 3) Most integration movements have done little except eliminate tariffs Mercosur in particular was supposed to be the EU of Latin America Fell apart in recession of 2001
Problem.Regional Integration is the only game in town at moment hasnt worked well Reinvigorating the GATT/WTO would take a major breakthrough Unlikely at present So stuck with regional trading agreements, which are becoming unpopular (TPP)
History of NAFTA Signed in 1994 under President Bill Clinton Expanded U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement to Mexico Eliminated all trade barriers (with some exceptions) Included environmental standards to prevent all industry from moving to Mexico Allowed for transnational shipping (a sticking point) DID NOT seek common external tariffs
Trade between U.S. and Mexico Somewhat Misleading 1994 is both NAFTAs first year and the year of the Tequila Crisis Mexican government went into technical default U.S. helped bail out through Brady Plan (Debt for Equity Swaps) At start of crisis, 6 pesos to the dollar
Quickly dropped to 9 to the dollar Mexican goods became much cheaper (Now 18 to the dollar) this might be an important factor in trade deficit However, one can see why anti-trade sentiment resonated in last election Jobs heading south, with products re-exported to U.S. Some remaining tariffs (Canada tariffs U.S. dairy
products) are maddening Other Nations that have Free Trade Agreements with U.S. Chile Colombia Peru Was supposed to be part of FTAA 34 nations
stretching from Argentina to Canada Politics went left in Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela and deal fell apart Repeated story of FTAs always seem to disappoint Trans-Pacific Partnership Proposed Membership
Australia Canada Japan Malaysia Mexico Peru United States Vietnam Chile
Brunei Singapore New Zealand Why Controversial. Experience with NAFTA (ballooning trade deficit) made some leery Incorporation of developing nations (e.g. Vietnam and Malaysia) unsettling to opponents
Although U.S. tariffs are very low, some labor-intensive goods still face significant tariffs Would have been dropped under TPP Probably little impact on entry of developed nations (tariffs already low, as noted) Innovations in TPP that were Supposed to Matter
Tight control on intellectual property theft But, had failed in the past Would have cut 18,000 tariffs Treated government entities with neutrality An issue for U.S. Hard to compete with government entities that have no downside risk Large number of environmental provisions (e.g. overfishing)
NAFTA also contained these never fully enforced Problem with FTAs in general for the U.S. mirrors that with the GATT/WTO The U.S. is the dominant producer of intellectual goods Abandoned much of our production of physical goods Theft is impossible to control Movies, software, drugs, etc. all get borrowed
GATT/WTO rules on intellectual property are strident, but frequently unenforceable In end, Regional Integration and the GATT/WTO Process are not Consistent With both stalled at present, hard to see how trade picture changes further
Maybe hard work is done, and not much more can be achieved WTO remains active as a dispute body Only means of preventing re-imposition of trade barriers Recent very important ruling against Airbus Europe has illegally subsidized Airbus in its fight against Boeing Week 3 Free Trade Debate Why is Free Trade now Controversial
U.S. appears to be the international patsy in terms of free trade Have run trade deficits since 1983 Appear large and unsustainable, yet they continue Has led to loss of jobs in manufacturing Most Americans dont feel rise in jobs in other sectors has been dramatic enough to compensate U.S. Trade Deficit Monthly Figures
Major Cause Abandonment of Dollar Standard in 1973 When dollar was only reserve currency, could not run deficits Would flood the world with dollars and collapse the fixed rate system Economists had no experience with floating rates and free capital flows
Misread impact Presumed Versus Actual Outcomes Presumed: Trade deficit Outflow of dollars Drop in value of dollar U.S. Exports up and Imports down Actual: Trade deficit Outflow of Dollars Inflow of Capital from abroad No change in value of dollar
Strong Dollar Policy of Clinton Era Intended partly to encourage purchase of U.S. treasuries Also meant to help developing nations Ended up institutionalizing U.S. trade deficits Some hoped that strong euro would push down deficits, at least with Europe But, continuing euro-crises have devalued euro
Individual Sectors in U.S. Hit Very Hard Textiles, Clothing, Appliances, Electronics Chinese entry into WTO (1994) accelerated process Current deficit with China is $350 billion per year Other major problem used to be energy (oil) Fracking has ended that issue
Textile jobs in U.S. Tariffs Removed in Phases, with Certain Parts of Sector Affected in Each Phase Long-term downward trend Unlikely to change
Pure free-traders would argue that is good U.S. should not be producing textiles But, communities in southeast built around textiles suffer Kansas City Fed: Costs $160,000 to save a single job in the luggage industry that pays about $30,000 Industries under Pressure Clothing, steel, low-end manufacturing (handicrafts,
home goods) Question then becomes. Even if everything is now vastly cheaper, does it matter if a large segment of the population is structurally unemployed Cant afford the lower price on the big-screen tv if unemployed Standard Theory behind Free Trade
(Ricardo) Nation with lower opportunity cost should produce good Example: It takes 2 laborers in Canada to produce 100 bf of lumber, while it takes 3 laborers in the U.S. Those three laborers could produce 100 bushels of wheat Opportunity cost of 100 bf of lumber is 100 bushels of wheat If it takes 5 laborers in Canada to produce 100 bushels of wheat (20 bushels/worker), Canada only sacrifices 40 bushels of wheat to produce the lumber lower O.C.
indicates Canada should produce timber Conversely, O.C. of wheat in Canada is much higher 100 bushels of wheat ties up 5 workers, which could have produced 250 bf of timber U.S. should produce wheat Two nations will then trade timber for wheat Result is unemployed Canadian farmers and
unemployed workers in U.S. timber industry If they can reasonably switch jobs, things are still OK Since Chinas Entry Seems like U.S. has a comparative advantage in nothing that is manufactured Yet China imports little from the U.S. in return for what we import Political pressure on Chinese officials works against any
change in practices On Positive Side Despite size of U.S. trade deficit ($500 billion per year), U.S. economy is not particularly open Still produce our food, energy, housing, etc. The majority of expenses of the average household Imports are about 15% of GDP In Europe, 50% is not uncommon
Imports as a Percentage of GDP Numbers at End Indicate a Decline in U.S. Openness Deficits are smaller now, but still represent a major problem (as noted earlier) Deficit appears to be structural its not going away
What do we Import and Export? Major Exports ($1.45 trillion in total) in 2016 Machinery including computers: US$190.5 billion (13.1% of total exports) Electrical machinery, equipment: $167.2 billion (11.5%) Aircraft, spacecraft: $134.6 billion (9.3%) Agriculture: $129.7 billion (soybeans is key product) Vehicles : $124.3 billion (8.5%) Mineral fuels including oil: $94.7 billion (6.5%) Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $82.0 billion (5.6%)
Plastics, plastic articles: $58.4 billion (4.0%) Much of it advanced manufacturing, although news reports would have us believe we dont produce much in the industrial sector Services Accounted for another $700 in exports U.S. does better in services than in goods
Comprised of banking, insurance, travel services, etc. Where does it go? Key trading partners: Canada, Mexico, China, Japan, UK, Germany Nice to see China on the list, but the number is actually small ($115 billion)
Approximately 11.5 million jobs supported by exports Imports $2.25 Trillion in total Electrical machinery, equipment: US$336 billion (14.9% of total imports) Machinery including computers: $315.4 billion (14%)
Vehicles: $285 billion (12.7%) Mineral fuels including oil: $163.4 billion (7.3%) Pharmaceuticals: $92.5 billion (4.1%) Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $80.8 billion (3.6%) Odd in some Ways.Sectors that are both Major Export and Import Sectors
Violates (sort of) notion of comparative advantage In many cases, represents intermediate components in an industry e.g. automobiles and machinery Summary.. Week 4 International Finance International Finance The Bretton Woods System
and Post-War Economic Relations International Finance refers (mostly) to currency arrangements, financial flows and international investing Start with currency arrangements Historically, World on Gold Standard Physical coinage the norm, but in early 1800s began issuing paper currency backed by gold
No treasury or central bank, so all private banks issued their own currency (1000s of different bills) Each currency worth a different amount very awkward system Not until 1860 that the U.S. establishes a treasury and adopts a formal currency U.S. uses bi-metallism to increase the amount of money in circulation
Volume of International Trade very Small Payment in coinage not a problem Could not conduct the $15 trillion in international trade that occurs today with money that has intrinsic value Demonstrated in 1973 when the Bretton-Woods system became destabilized as world trade grew (and deficits grew)
Gold Standard Abandoned in Lead up to Great Depression Britain uncouples in 1931 Result: No formalized system of exchange rates and payments Bretton-Woods System (1944) established U.S. Dollar as the reserve currency System held together until 1973, then collapsed due to
speculative pressure on the dollar Current System Nations choose to float their currencies, fix their currencies against another currency, etc. Experience has shown that the extremes are most viable either freely floating or hard peg Experimental currency arrangements in the middle can be unstable (e.g. soft pegging, which helped cause the Asian Financial Crisis)
In some instances, nations adopt another nations currency (Argentina 1992-2001, Ecuador, Panama) Provides great stability, but cannot have monetary policy World Trade Requires Reserve Currencies Hard currencies against which other currencies are valued & are part of a nations international reserves
In absence, cannot answer the question, what is the Mexican peso worth? Traditional Reserve Currencies are: U.S. $, Canadian $, British . The , Japanese , Swiss Franc Have now (strangely) added Chinese Yuan Unlike other reserve currencies, it is not freely floating, but is pegged to other reserve currencies
Dollar Remains Dominant as a % of Reserve Holdings In Addition to Being Part of Reserves.. Trade between nations is billed in dollars, euros, etc. When Thailand trades with Malaysia, it is in dollars, not Thai Bhat or Malaysian Ringgits. Once again, Yuan is absent from this part of being a
reserve currency No one (outside China) is billing in Yuan Other Aspects of International Finance Capital Flows Movement of financial funds from one nation to another In the case of the U.S., largely due to our trade deficit Dollars are recycled back to U.S. through Direct Foreign
Investment (DFI) or short-term capital flows (purchase of financial assets) Potential danger in this U.S. has been selling itself off to pay for its trade deficits for many years Recently, large increase in U.S. debt held by foreigners Major Holders of U.S. Official Debt Japan, China, Ireland (?), Brazil, Cayman Islands, Switzerland, UK
By Numbers: Japan: $1.10 trillion China: $1.06 trillion Ireland: $308 billion Brazil: $258 billion Cayman Islands: $258 billion For Three of the Five (Japan, China, Brazil)
Holdings are part of policy to manipulate value of currency Mechanism: U.S. trade deficit Downward pressure on $ Nation (Japan) gets rid of excess dollars by buying treasuries U.S. dollar remains over-valuedJapanese goods competitive Explains holdings of Japan, China and Brazil Cayman Islands is a result of its role as a financial center Irish Holdings are Larger than its
Entire Economy Ireland has become haven for off-shore investments Much like the Cayman Islands Produces odd result Chinese Holdings are Worrisome Over 5% of total U.S. official debt Cannot assure that holdings will not be used as a weapon at some point in the future
Geopolitical conflict could lead to dumping of treasuries and destabilization of U.S. financial markets Other Forms of Financial Flows Hot Money Short-term financial holdings that rapidly shift to nation with highest returns Sometimes used as term for illicit flows not the meaning here
Short-term financial flows that focus on bond and stock purchases Long-term flows (Direct Foreign Investment) DFI is Important Source of Economic Growth Particularly for developing nations Provides capital that is not available domestically
Some risk in terms of loss of autonomy Large, important investments become politically important For U.S., LT investments totaled $112 Billion in 2014, and was spread out over multiple nations Risk lower Week #5 The Currency Problem International currency system is in state of flux
Dollars role is declining to a degree Other currencies (Yuan) are rising in importance Can be somewhat destabilizing Problems in the Eurozone have reversed a trend towards greater use of the Until the Greek (and other crises) are resolved, the euro is unlikely to rise in importance
How does one Create a Currency out of Nothing? As part of the continued push for integration, the EU moved towards a common currency in 1991 Under the Maastricht Treaty Would assist Union in two ways Make prices transparent Reduce transaction costs
More importantly, became a symbol of deep integration World Skeptical at First Dramatic decline in Value right after introduction in 2001 Introduced at $1.23, declined to 88 cents before recovering Then jumped to $1.60/euro Which then made goods produced in the Eurozone
noncompetitive Recently, sustained downward pressure due to PIIGS crisis Multiple Problems with Introduction Criteria for joining ignored (government deficit less than 3% of GDP, government debt less than 60% of GDP) Routinely brushed aside, particularly in 2008-09 Cannot have a common currency when governments
are free to borrow whatever they want Led to crisis and now permanent problem with Greece (not solvable in the next century) Inclination is Towards Further Controls on Spending Pushes up against problem of autonomy versus cooperation Greece has no autonomy left its government is run
from Brussels Although its social programs were absurdly generous, they were the will of the Greek people No way to fund 30 years of retirement at 55 anymore The Vanishing Greek Economy Overall Assessment for the euro not Particularly Positive
Other regions have suggested moving towards a common currency (CARICOM) Euro provides some guidance on the major issues that will arise Fundamental Problem with Reserve Currencies If they move too much, those nations that peg their currencies against them are along for the ride
Pegged to the $: When dollar rises in value, exports of nation become more expensive may create a problem with deficits When dollar falls in value, imports become more expensive Odd example OPEC has always billed for oil in dollars. Falling dollar means OPEC gets less purchasing power for oil Recent Innovation Pegging Against a Basket of Currencies (China)
Significantly reduces variability One currency may be going up when the other goes down Can adjust composition of basket to achieve desired stability and valuation Example (made up): 1 Yuan = 1/4 of a dollar, 1/6 of a euro, etc. Unless dollar and euro move exactly together in value, variability will be reduced
Suggestion has also been raised to create a world currency Would reduce transactions costs by trillions of dollars Eliminates currency variability and risk Creates as many problems as it solves Who would be responsible for integrity of currency? Who would decide how much new currency to issue? What is it worth? Nothing to peg it against.
Could Transition the Currency of the International Monetary Fund into a Peg The SDR (Special Drawing Rights) acts as a pseudocurrency Financial instruments (bonds) can be written in SDR Has an official value against other currencies $1.3832 = 1 SDR (May)
IMF could act as a sort of world bank Does not eliminate problems about magnitude of world money supply a complicated concept Week #6 Developing Nations in the World Financial System History of significant issues with currency arrangements/financial flows Developing nations avoided freely-floating their currencies
Too much instability So chose some form of pegging: Hard peg, soft peg, crawling peg, dollarization African nations pegged to Franc (and then euro) Rest of world used dollars Some regimes abandoned soft pegs are dangerous Significant Problems.
As noted earlier, once pegged, currency is along for the ride May get unintentional over- or under-valuation Also, cannot have independent monetary policy Efforts go into supporting peg, not domestic policy Because of these issues, more small countries now freely-float and put up with the uncertainty
Capital Flows Back in 1970s, very controversial At least for Direct Foreign Investment DFI viewed with suspicion Particularly loss of control over economy Typical scenario Large firm puts manufacturing plant in developing nation (labor cheaper) e.g. Nike in Indonesia
Company then extracts profits (viewed as theft by some) Firm may acquire political influence Too big to offend Government may bend to prevent alienating business Movie Gung Ho portrays how this might play out when the US was the target of DFI in the auto industry
This is legitimate concern, but also a reflection of poor institutional structure that allows inappropriate influence to occur Some Nations Restrict DFI Result is generally lower growth, although may avoid some instability due to capital flows East Asian Financial Crisis (1999) provides illustration on how NOT to engage with world
What Happened? In 1999, the currencies of the Asian Tigers (S. Korea, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand) came under speculative attack Had soft-pegged their currencies pegged, but not credibly, against the dollar When speculators attacked, pegs collapsed Currencies were interdependent Thai Bhat went first, then the Ringgit, Rupiah, Won
Crisis threatened to bring down banking system Even caused Russia to go into default Strangest Part of Arrangements in Region Direct Foreign Investment huge Obtained through selling dollar-denominated bonds When crisis started, money yanked No cost to investors, since bonds not in local currency
Caused mass exodus Crisis took year to resolve (near bankruptcy of S. Korea) Soft pegging no longer considered a rational currency arrangement Venezuela When it all Goes Wrong Largest oil reserves in the world, although Oil is hard to process
A decade ago, money pouring into country to develop petroleum industry Output recently peaked (2014) at about 3 million barrels per day Is now on a straight downward path As country is falling apart economically, cost of declining revenue very high Result of Political Instability
Foreign investment has completely dried up Petroleum industry infrastructure is crumbling Using what is left of foreign reserves (hard currency) to try to prevent the Bolivar from collapsing Country will be insolvent in three years Attempt to shore up currency system Multi-tier currency rates (4 different rates)
Rate 1: 6.5 Bolivars/dollar (importation of food and medicine) Rate 2: 12/$ and 50/$ for importation of other goods rate available only sporadically through an auction process Newest rate: 200/$ -> for purchase and sale of foreign currency to individuals and businesses System impossible to navigate in the presence of 800% inflation, value of Bolivar will continue to deteriorate
Resolution In absence of political reform, probably will have to adopt a foreign currency as legal tender to end crisis Civil War seems almost inevitable at this point Ironically, the U.S. $ makes the most sense (the international oil market functions in dollars) Given attitude of President Maduro, likely will end in political upheaval, and not reform
Erasmus Exchange in Ionian University 30 april - 3 May 2018 * * Fitness Based Selection GA Genetic Algorithms - Termination Condition GA The termination condition of a Genetic Algorithm is important in determining when a GA run will end.
PCN value and RAG rating. 9. The PCN values have been calculated from LSOA, ward, practice or school level data using one of two methods: 1) Aggregated data: PCN values are created from aggregated counts and denominators, where data is...
Sydney Fleming. Tanara Burke. TaushaPhillis. ... (PMP®, etc.) for the PMI-Metrolina Chapter. The individual for this position must assist the Chairperson with a variety of internal and externals stakeholders to effectively execute these events. Saturday attendance is required during the...
30 JANUARY 2019 | DIGITAL CONSTRUCTION SUMMIT @UK_CW #DIGICONSUMMIT . Transforming. Construction. Long termtargets. Lower costs. 33%. reduction in the initial costs of construction and the whole life cost of built asset
No, §112(f) applies to limitations, not entire claims. Method claims typically include both process limitations and structural limitations, and the structural limitations can be expressed in a means-plus-function format. The mere fact that the structural limitation appears in a method...
Kim won a contest on the radio. The prize was a restaurant gift certificate and tickets to a sporting event. She can select one of three restaurants and tickets for football, baseball, basketball, or hockey game. How many different ways...
Ready to download the document? Go ahead and hit continue!