Pedro Maria Martinez Villar

• Doctor of Philosophy
• Fellow at University of Leon

Central banks have been responding swiftly and decisively to the collapse of the real economy due to the cov19 pandemic. This unprecedented intervention, based on huge injections of liquidity, lowering of interest rates and massive purchases of public debt has brought financial markets to all-time highs. In the same way, these measures have supported an economic recovery, the reality of which is showing us that it has been very rapid in some countries.

However, the sheer size of this response could also create problems in the future. One of them is the possibility that the massive quantitative easing programs will generate a growth in the money supply on a scale that ends up causing a sustained increase in inflation, with the risks that this entails.

Another latent risk is the possible impact on the dollar derived from a prolonged process of interest rates close to zero and extraordinary levels of direct monetary expansion, which will have direct effects on those countries commercially and financially exposed to the US. I would appreciate your opinions. about. Sincerely.

Are the big brands making a comeback or is the importance of private labels being reinforced? The pandemic has strengthened large brands that have adopted ad hoc communication and advertising strategies. According to the concultora McKinsey, large companies have increased their market share by 1% during the past 2020 and a greater increase is expected throughout this 2021. However, during the confinement a willingness of people to subordinate has also been detected the choice based on the brand to the availability of the product, which has been a new opportunity for private labels.

Analyzing the evolution of the FED balance, an expansion of its balance is observed in 2,200 trillion USD (+58% in a month and a half), being together with the reduction of the interest rate the two main monetary measures to "rescue the US economy" of the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. I believe that the first consequence of this massive monetary injection in the markets has been a recovery in the stock markets, which have already exceeded 30% since March lows, and a relaxation of the returns on corporate fixed income.

But what real effects are these measures going to have on the real economy? Will this monetary policy contribute to economic growth, will they create inflation? Or are they only intended to reassure financial markets? I appreciate your contributions. Thank you.

In recent years, the United States has experienced economic growth, low inflation, debt and deficit growth, low interest rates and rising stock markets simultaneously. Classical economic theory tells us that the presence of these economic phenomenas are incompatible. In fact, economic history tells us that they have not coexisted historically, except recently, and I believe that if this has been because of the expansionary activity of the monetary policies promoted by the Fed.

Do you think that this scenario of simultaneity of economic growth, low inflation, debt and deficit growth, low interest rates and rising stock markets is going to be extended much more over time and what will be its final consequences?

Based on my experience, most purchases or mergers of companies do not provide long-term value to the shareholders and customers of the organizations. In fact, there is value destruction and generally the expected synergies are difficult to materialize in terms of competitiveness, especially in the case of companies whose negotiating power in the M & A process is lower. Can you tell me your impressions about it?

Public administrations have been subjected for decades to intense pressures aimed at improving their performance (budget deficits), but at the same time, they also have the obligation to better serve the needs of citizens and create public value in increasingly digital environments. Based in your experience, I would like to know your opinions to know if you have seen an improvement both in terms of effectiveness and efficiency of public services in your countries. Thanks in advance for your answers.

This question aims to open a debate on the current role of universities from a point of promotion of the person and its contribution to a world in continuous evolution but that at the same time must maintain values ​​and ethical behaviors necessary for its sustainability

If there were no economic activity, the poorest countries would hardly have pollution because there is no industrial activity with which to degrade the environment. In this sense, we must ask ourselves why it is in the least developed and poorest spaces where we see more environmental pollution. Are companies from rich countries who pollute the economically poorest countries due to offshoring and industrial outsourcing?

An interesting statement about the relationship between economic growth and the environment was proposed by Simon Kuznets, Nobel Prize in Economics in 1971.

This author proposes the theory of the Environmental Curve, which represents how the growth of the economy affects the environment, and establishes a relationship between these two variables by drawing an 'inverted U', so that, as the growth of the economy increases , environmental degradation only increases to a certain point, from which it begins to diminish. That is, when a moment of economic development arrives, it no longer negatively affects the environment. The conclusion of this theory is that economic growth is not a threat to the environment in the long term, but the requirement to improve its quality.