_49215.jpg)
Tuesday, 11 February 2025
Japanese reactor cleared for use beyond 50 years
_49215.jpg)
Thursday, 9 January 2025
World's oldest person dies in Japan at 116
Tuesday, 19 November 2024
Ruthless Japan beat China to move to brink of World Cup qualification
Sunday, 13 October 2024
Japan auto show returns, playing catchup on EVs
Wednesday, 25 September 2024
More than 95,000 Japanese aged over 100, most of them women

Friday, 6 September 2024
Fuel debris removal attempt halted at Fukushima Daiichi
.jpg?ext=.jpg)
Thursday, 4 April 2024
Figure skating: Japan’s Kaori Sakamoto wins 3rd straight world title

Thursday, 28 March 2024
Despite Faulty Metal Detector, Treasure Hunter Unearths Largest Gold Nugget Ever Found in England



Wednesday, 6 March 2024
Nuclear output to reach new record by 2025, says IEA

Tuesday, 5 March 2024
WTO conference ends in division and stalemate – does the global trade body have a viable future?
The 13th World Trade Organization (WTO) ministerial conference in Abu Dhabi has failed to resolve any issues of significance, raising the inescapable question of whether the global trade body has a future.
The three-day meeting was due to end on February 29. But late into a fourth extra day, the 164 members were struggling to even agree on a declaration, let alone the big issues of agriculture, fisheries and border taxes on electronic commerce.
The closing ceremony was sombre, and the ministerial declaration bland, stripped of the substantive content previously proposed. Outstanding issues were kicked back to the WTO base in Geneva for further discussions, or for the next ministerial conference in 2026.
Briefing journalists in the closing hours, an EU spokesperson noted how hard it would be to pick up the pieces in Geneva after they failed to create momentum at the ministerial conference. She predicted:
[Trade] will be more and more characterised by power relations than the rule of law, and that will be a problem notably for smaller countries and for developing countries.
Restricted access
That imbalance is already evident, with power politics characterising the conference from the start.
There were accusations of unprecedented restrictions on non-governmental organisations (NGOs) registered to participate in the conference. These bodies are crucial to bringing the WTO’s impacts on farmers, fishers, workers and other communities into the negotiation arena.
A number of NGOs have submitted formal complaints over their treatment by conference host the United Arab Emirates. They say they were isolated from delegations, banned from distributing papers, and people were arbitrarily detained for handing out press releases.
Critical negotiations were conducted through controversial “green rooms”. These were where the handpicked “double quad” members – the US, UK, European Union, Canada, China, India, South Africa and Brazil – tried to broker outcomes to present to the rest for “transparency”.
Influence of power politics
These powerful countries largely determined the outcomes (or lack of them). The US, historically the agenda-setter at WTO ministerial conferences, appeared largely disinterested in the proceedings, with trade representative Katherine Tai leaving early.
The final declaration says nothing about restoring a two-tier dispute body, which has been paralysed since 2019 by the refusal of successive US Republican and Democratic administrations to appoint new judges to the WTO’s appellate body.
The EU failed to secure progress on improvements to the appeal process. Likely Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has already announced he would impose massive WTO-illegal tariffs on China if elected.
China, Japan, the US and EU – all big subsidisers of distant water fishing fleets – blocked an outcome aiming to protect global fish stocks, an issue already deferred from the last ministerial meeting.
The six Pacific Island WTO members lobbied tirelessly for a freeze and eventual reduction in subsidies. But the text was diluted to the point that no deal was better than a bad deal.
The EU, UK, Switzerland and other pharmaceutical producers had already blocked consensus on lifting patents for COVID-19 therapeutics and diagnostics, sought by 65 developing countries. A deal brokered in 2021 on COVID vaccines is so complex no country has used it.
Domestic and global agendas
India’s equally uncompromising positions also reflected domestic priorities. The 2013 Bali ministerial conference promised developing countries a permanent solution to prevent legal challenges to India’s subsidised stockpiling of food for anti-hunger programmes.
A permanent solution was a red line for India, which faces an election next month and mass protests from farmers concerned at losing subsidies.
Agricultural exporters, including New Zealand, tabled counter-demands to broaden the agriculture negotiations. The public stockpiling issue remains a stalemate, without any real prospect of a breakthrough.
India and South Africa formally objected to the adoption of an unmandated plurilateral agreement on investment facilitation.
The concerns were less with the agreement itself and more with the precedent it would create for sub-groups of members to bypass the WTO’s rule book. This would allow powerful states to advance their favoured issues while developing country priorities languish.
Crisis and transformation
The face-saver for the conference was the temporary extension of a highly contested moratorium on the right to levy customs duties at the border on transmissions of digitised content.
Securing that extension (or preferably a permanent ban on e-commerce customs duties) on behalf of Big Tech was the main US goal for the conference. Developing countries opposed its renewal, so they could impose tariffs both for revenue and to support their own digital industrialisation.
The moratorium will now expire in March 2026, so the battle will resume at the next ministerial conference scheduled to be held in Cameroon that year.
But there is every likelihood the current paralysis at the WTO will continue, and the power politics will intensify. As the previously quoted EU spokesperson also mused:
Perhaps the WTO needed a good crisis, and perhaps this will lead to a realisation that we cannot continue like this.
Ideally, that would result in a fundamentally different international institution – one that provides real solutions to the 21st century challenges on which the WTO is unable to deliver.
Jane Kelsey, Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Thursday, 29 February 2024
India slowly taking export market share from China, study shows

- 28 February 2024, (Bloomberg) — India is chipping away at China’s dominance in electronics exports in some key markets as manufacturers diversify supply chains away from the world’s factory to other parts of Asia, a new study shows.
- The impact is most pronounced in the UK and US, where geopolitical tensions with China have increased in recent years.
- India’s electronics exports to the US as a ratio of China’s increased to 7.65% in November last year from 2.51% in November 2021, according to London-based Fathom Financial Consulting. In the UK, the share rose to 10% from 4.79%.
- India’s government is luring electronics manufacturers to the country with heavy incentives, such as tax cuts, rebates, easier land acquisition and capital support. The aim is to expand the domestic manufacturing industry in order to export more, and help businesses grow to global scale through partnerships.
- India houses Samsung Electronics Co.’s biggest mobile phone factory, while Apple Inc. makes at least 7% of all its iPhones in India through its contract manufacturer Foxconn Technology Group and Pegatron Corp.
- The rise in electronic exports is “likely the result of Foxconn’s increasing investment in India,” Andrew Harris, an economist at Fathom Financial Consulting, wrote in a note last week.
- India’s progress in gaining market share has been more limited in Europe and Japan, “suggesting a move towards dual supply chains (China plus one) rather than a complete abandonment of China-based production, at least for now,” Harris said. The report shows that India’s electronics exports as a ratio of China’s was 3.38% in Germany and 3.52% globally.
- Indian companies have been touting their role in multinationals’ ‘China plus one’ strategy, which sees manufacturers developing back-up capacity in other countries.India’s rising market share is a boost for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has touted his ‘Make in India’ plan as a way of creating jobs, expanding exports and making the economy more self reliant by reducing the need for imports. He’s widely expected to win a third term in office in elections due within a few months. India slowly taking export market share from China, study shows
Monday, 9 October 2023
Women aren’t failing at science

Female research scientists are more productive than their male colleagues, though they are widely perceived as being less so. Women are also rewarded less for their scientific achievements.
That’s according to my team’s study for United Nations University - Merit on gender inequality in scientific research in Mexico, published as a working paper in December 2016.
The study, part of the project “Science, Technology and Innovation Gender Gaps and their Economic Costs in Latin America and the Caribbean”, was financed by the Gender and Diversity Fund of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).
The ‘productivity puzzle’
The study, which looked at women’s status in 42 public universities and 18 public research centres, some managed by Mexico’s National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT), focused on a question that has been widely investigated: why are women in science less productive than men, in almost all academic disciplines and regardless of the productivity measure used?
The existence of this “productivity puzzle” is well documented, from South Africa to Italy, but few studies have sought to identify its possible causes.
Our findings demonstrate that, in Mexico at least, the premise of the productivity puzzle is false, when we control for factors such as promotion to senior academic ranks and selectivity.
Using an econometric modelling approach, including several macro simulations to understand the economic costs of gender gaps to the Mexican academic system, our study focused on researchers within Mexico’s National System of Researchers.

Additionally, despite the common belief that maternity leaves make women less productive in key periods of their careers, female researchers in fact have only between 5% to 6% more non-productive years than males. At senior levels, the difference drops to 1%.
Nonetheless, in the universities and research centres we studied, Mexican women face considerable barriers to success. At public research centres, women are 35% less likely to be promoted, and 89% of senior ranks were filled by men in 2013, though women comprised 24% of research staff and 33% at non-senior levels. Public universities do slightly better (but not well): female researchers there are 22% less likely to be promoted than men.
Overall, 89% of all female academics in our sample never reached senior levels in the period studied (2002 to 2013).
In some ways this data should not be surprising. Mexico ranks 66th out of 144 in the World Economic Forum’s 2016 Global Gender Gap Report and a 2015 report by the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) showed that among OECD countries Mexico has the widest overall gender gap in labour participation rates.
Some efforts are being made to improve gender equality in research. In 2013 Mexico amended four articles of its Science and Technology Law to promote gender equality in those fields, adding provisions to promote gender-balanced participation in publicly funded higher education institutions and collect gender-specific data to measure the impact of gender on science and technology policies.
Several CONACYT research centres have launched initiatives to promote gender equality among staff, but many of these internal programmes are limited to anti-discrimination and sexual harassment training.
More aggressive programmes include: the Research Centre on Social Anthopology’s graduate scholarship programme, in collaboration with CONACYT and the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples, to promote higher education and training among indigenous women; and policies to increase women’s participation in higher academic ranks and management at the CIATEQ technological institute, which also gives childcare subsidies to female staff.
But such examples are rare. Overall, women hoping to succeed in Mexican academia must work harder and produce more than their male colleagues to be even considered for promotion to senior ranks.
This persistent inequality has implications not just for women but for the country’s scientific production: if Mexico were to eliminate gender inequality in promotions, the national academic system would see 17% to 20% more peer-reviewed articles published.
A global glass ceiling
Mexico is not alone. Our previous research in France and South Africa, using the same econometric model, found that gender inequalities there also prevent women scientists from being promoted to higher academic ranks.
Examining French physicists working in the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and in French public universities, we learned that female physicists in CNRS are as productive as their male colleagues or more so. Yet they are 6.3% less likely to be promoted within CNRS and 16.3% within universities. This is notable in a country that ranks 17th in the world in gender equality, according to the World Economic Forum.

In Uruguay the same IDB gender gaps project identified a glass ceiling as well. There women are underrepresented in the highest academic ranks and have a 7.1% less probability than men of being promoted to senior levels.
Moreover, from Mexico and Uruguay to France and South Africa, a vicious cycle between promotion and productivity is at play: difficulties in getting promoted reduce the prestige, influence and resources available to women. In turn, those factors can lead to lower productivity, which decreases their chances of promotion.
This two-way causality creates a source of endogeneity biases when including seniority as a variable to explain productivity in an econometric model. Only when we control for this, as well as for a selectivity bias (that is, publishing occurrence), do we find that female researchers are more productive than their male counterparts. Without these corrections, a gender productivity gap of 10% to 21% appears in favour of men.
The view that women are failing at science is commonly held, but evidence shows that, across the world, it’s science that’s failing women. Action must be taken to ensure that female researchers are treated fairly, recognised for their work, and promoted when they’ve earned it.
Lorena Rivera León, Economist and Research Fellow, United Nations University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Thursday, 24 August 2023
How gender inequality is hindering Japan’s economic growth






Friday, 14 October 2022
Japan-India joint working group on ICT calls for increased cooperation
Tuesday, 12 July 2022
Japan`s ruling party secures strong win after Abe assassination

Saturday, 9 July 2022
Shinzo Abe: Japan`s longest-serving prime minister
