Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods
and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage
labour and competitive markets.

In a capitalist market economy, investments are determined by private decision and the parties to a transaction
typically determine the prices at which they exchange assets, goods, and services.

Davos Manifesto 2020: The Universal Purpose of a Company in the Fourth Industrial Revolution

02 Dec 2019, Klaus Schwab
B20 Summit, an international summit meeting of delegates from business groups around the world.


Business Letter on the RepowerEU Plan (University of Cambridge, Corporate Leaders Groups) | modernizing principles on the role of a corporation (tools, ESG, blockchain) | Reuters Business | Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG, CSR and PRI) | European SPES Institute, promoting spirituality in economic and social life | Business in Europe | Small Business Act for Europe


modernizing principles on the role
of a corporation
Compared to any other economic system this odd mixture of capitalism and free markets that we use makes the average person wonderfully, hugely, stinking rich. The average living standard of a modern inhabitant of the rich world is around 40 times higher than that of just about everyone in history. And that's actually the defining difference of this capitalism and free market mix: it's the only economic system anyone's ever tried which has substantially and sustainably raised the living standards of the average worker drone out in the street. Absolutely no other economic system has managed to achieve that. Sure, there's flavours and varieties, we can argue the benefits of social democracy as against laissez faire all we want. The basic underlying point is true: private ownership of productive assets combined with markets as the planning and information system for the economy just seem to have worked.

But does the economic system still meet the needs of the vast majority of people and are incentives embedded that make it designed to fail in times ahead? The perverse incentives inherent in a largely unconstrained capitalist system still exist. These incentives drive behaviors that increase inequality, reduce social mobility, devalue

communities, deplete soils, acidify oceans, destroy biodiversity, trigger mass migrations and social instability, and fuel violence and war. These perverse incentives lead to concrete business practices such as predatory pricing, wage suppression, insufficient investment in a just transition to zero-carbon business models, as well as business trends that are or are likely to impose huge costs on taxpayers resulting from rising contract labor, accelerating automation and worsening natural disasters. From the perspectives of a growing number of business leaders, investors and policy makers, these incentives are now creating unacceptable systemic risk. This is why the systemic design flaws in unconstrained capitalism are creating unlikely bedfellows such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Vice President Mike Pence and BlackRock CEO Larry Fink. The good news is that today There Is a Credible Alternative. It is no longer acceptable to lament the constraints of market forces, wishing there were a tool that could harness unconstrained capitalism’s otherwise amoral power for a higher purpose than profit maximization. ESG factors and tools as the blockchain are here today, and succesivily it is under the attention or use by companies across the globe.
Companies that adopt benefit corporation governance create greater accountability to serve the public interest (that’s all of us, by the way) because they are required to consider the impact of their decisions not only on their shareholders but also on their workers, customers, suppliers, communities and the environment.

The point is that the world’s largest investors, political leaders and thought leaders across the ideological spectrum agree on one thing: We need to evolve this institution of capitalism so that it is serving the interests of all people and communities, not just the interests of shareholders. We need to reform the institution of capitalism so that “in order to maximize profit” is no longer the driving force and sole purpose of business.



In the U.S., Congressman Joseph Kennedy III, the grandson of Robert Kennedy, has taken up the concept of moral capitalism as a
balance of interests between the productive forces creating wealth
for society and all those who stand to benefit from such activity ->


GBBC Blockchain Central UNGA, 12 September 2023


GBBC is the leading industry association for the blockchain technology ecosystem, showcasing how blockchain technology can be used to advance the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and working alongside businesses to ensure that blockchain technology delivers the expected results and impact, and ultimately works towards changing the world for the better.

February 9, 2022, Sandra Ro gave testimony at a full Committee Hearing on 'Examining Digital Assets: Risks, Regulation, and Innovation' in the Senate office building


(*) The Caux Round Table Principles for Business and Stoic Humanism by Stephen B. Young (the practical advice of the Stoics, particularly the later Stoics, who wrote in Roman times), and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Human Capital Disclosure (a decision gust 2020 by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) which now requires companies to provide the public with more information on their human capital).

The Caux Round Table for Moral Capitalism, from the adoption of its ethical Principles for Business 25 years ago in 1994, accepted as necessary for good business risk management prudent responsibility for the impacts of a business on stakeholders. Such concern implicates the future profits of a business. Good risk management of stakeholder relationships makes future profits more certain. Certainty of future earnings improves the net present value of a business. But our financial mechanics of putting a value on a business is timeworn, placing a blindfold on owners, managers and investors, preventing them from seeing clearly the real value of a business. We are convening round tables in various cities around the world to explore how valuation methodology can be modernized for the current era of sustainability. Research firm Oxford Analytica prepared a background report on valuation methodology and current initiatives to improve it.

The late 2000s and early 2010s, a period of general economic decline was observed in world markets, culminating in the Great Recession. A large number of factors were the cause of this: faltering financial and economic systems, rulers from that time, the ever-more flexible regulation and legislation and powerlessness to timely correct, have ensured that societies derailed. The crisis also clearly demonstrated how we are strongly interconnected.

Since the intent of the Caux Round Table for Moral Capitalism is to offer practical help and not be too overly conceptual, discursive and academic, they consistently seek to provide with evidence of alignment between the recommendations and wider perspectives on business and financial realities. Recently, McKinsey & Company sent a paper on "purpose." Purpose has become a trendy word in the last year, or so, for highlighting intentions. As the McKinsey paper advocates, purpose focuses our intentions into a channel of dedication and collaboration leading to success. Here you may find the paper and the full version can be found here.


International Sustainability
Standards Board
the UN’s principles for
responsible investment (PRI)
ESG - how can we measure how
‘good’ companies are?
will the acronym ESG make place
  Board Members
Are Concerned
That Companies
Will Not Deliver
on ESG Goals

(March 30, 2022, BCG/INSEAD Board Survey


The Future of ESG:

Supplying the Demand

June 2022

  for 'integrated   reporting'?

The Catholic Church’s social teachings about capitalism were the topic of Bishop Barron’s keynote address. “Every single pope in the church has affirmed the most central element of the market economy: private property,” he said.

“Private property is grounded in the dignity and freedom of the individual. Private property allows the diffusion of power, not concentration in the hands of a few.

The Church likes the entrepreneurial spirit.” Yet the popes have noted that because God made the world for everyone, the common good must be uppermost in the minds of capitalist Christians.

Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) refers to the three central factors in measuring the sustainability and societal impact of an investment in a company or business. These criteria help to better determine the future financial performance of companies (return and risk). Asset managers and other financial institutions increasingly rely on ESG ratings agencies to assess, measure and compare companies' ESG performance.  More recently, data providers have applied artificial intelligence to rate companies and their commitment to ESG.  Each rating agency uses its own set of metrics to measure the level of ESG compliance and there is, at present, no industry-wide set of common standards.

One of the major issues in the ESG area is disclosure. Environmental risks created by business activities have actual or potential negative impact on air and land, water, ecosystems, and human health. The information on which an investor makes their decisions on a financial level is fairly simply gathered. The company's accounts can be examined, and although the accounting practices of corporate business are coming increasingly into disrepute after a spate of recent financial scandals, the figures are for the most part externally verifiable. With ESG considerations, the practice has been for the company under examination to provide its own figures and disclosures.  These have seldom been externally verified and the lack of universal standards and regulation in the areas of environmental and social practice mean that the measurement of such statistics is subjective to say the least. As integrating ESG considerations into investment analysis and the calculation of a company's value become more prevalent it will become more crucial to provide units of measurement for investment decisions on subjective issues such as degrees of harm to workers, or how far down the supply chain of the production chain of a cluster bomb do you go.

A method of cost accounting that traces direct costs and allocates indirect costs by collecting and presenting information about the possible environmental, social and economical costs and benefits or advantages – in short, about the "triple bottom line" – for each proposed alternative. It is known as Environmental full-cost accounting (EFCA) or  true-cost accounting (TCA).

Washington D.C., May 25, 2022 —

The Securities and Exchange Commission today proposed amendments to rules and reporting forms to promote consistent, comparable and reliable information for investors concerning funds' and advisers' incorporation of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors.  The proposed changes would apply to certain registered investment advisers, advisers exempt from registration, registered investment companies and business development companies.

"I am pleased to support this proposal because, if adopted, it would establish disclosure requirements for funds and advisers that market themselves as having an ESG focus," said SEC Chair Gary Gensler.  "ESG encompasses a wide variety of investments and strategies.  I think investors should be able to drill down to see what's under the hood of these strategies.  This gets to the heart of the SEC's mission to protect investors, allowing them to allocate their capital efficiently and meet their needs."

The proposed amendments seek to categorize certain types of ESG strategies broadly and require funds and advisers to provide more specific disclosures in fund prospectuses, annual reports and adviser brochures based on the ESG strategies they pursue.  Funds focused on the consideration of environmental factors generally would be required to disclose the greenhouse gas emissions associated with their portfolio investments.  Funds claiming to achieve a specific ESG impact would be required to describe the specific impact(s) they seek to achieve and summarize their progress on achieving those impacts.  Funds that use proxy voting or other engagement with issuers as a significant means of implementing their ESG strategy would be required to disclose information regarding their voting of proxies on particular ESG-related voting matters and information concerning their ESG engagement meetings.

Thus, did the SEC, a global leader in using disclosure of material facts to improve the outcomes of financial capitalism, let slip that with ESG, beauty is in the eye of the beholder?  From a disciplined standpoint of valuation methodology, ESG is chaos on stilts.

To bring about its desired order in investing markets, the SEC's notice of its proposed regulations is 362 pages long, not quite as long as Qur'an, but likewise a challenge to memorize.

John C. Wilcox, Chairman Emeritus of Morrow Sodali, has written a short commentary titled "Beyond ESG – An Integrated Approach to Governance, Investing and Regulation" that I wanted to share with you:
"Time for a Name Change" is the title of a thought-provoking article posted recently on LinkedIn by Stephen Davis, Senior Fellow and Associate Director at Harvard Law School's Program on Corporate Governance.  

Davis argues that the acronym "ESG" has outlived its usefulness and needs to be replaced.  Writing largely from the viewpoint of investment professionals, he suggests a new term: "360-degree investing."  I agree with Davis that a new term to replace ESG is urgently needed.  But while "360-degree investing" works for asset managers, it does not work for companies.  Even so, Davis's key point makes sense – "ensuring that both investors and companies take account of risks and opportunities that lie outside conventional accounting."  

To replace "ESG" for companies, as well as investors, I would propose use of the already familiar term "integrated."  One of the dictionary definitions of integrated is: with two or more things combined in order to become more effective.  Applied to evaluating business enterprises, an integrated approach could effectively combine environmental, social and governance considerations together with traditional financial and accounting metrics.  In addition to inclusiveness, an integrated approach could lead to more realistic regulation aligned with the way businesses are run day-to-day.  

Corporate managers must constantly keep their eyes on the road, juggle multiple risks and opportunities, monitor competitors, listen to customers and stakeholders, adjust to market changes and react to ad hoc events.  Managing a business enterprise is itself an exercise in integrated thinking and organization.

In support of the proposed integrated approach, here are a few points to be considered:

1. We should build on the concept of "integrated reporting" that has already achieved widespread acceptance globally.  The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) has long promoted efforts to reduce companies' siloed organizational structures and encourage holistic corporate management and reporting.  The IIRC is now a part of the Value Reporting Foundation, which also includes SASB and which through the IFRS Foundation has established the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB

2. We need to eliminate the "zero-sum" thinking that pits ESG against traditional accounting and financial metrics.  One of the most important lessons we have learned from the emergence of ESG is that these so-called "intangibles," "externalities" and purportedly "non-financial" factors do in fact have measurable financial impact on companies

 3. It is no longer appropriate to refer to E, S and G collectively or to treat them as a separate category of issues distinguishable from the traditional business considerations captured in spreadsheets and financial reports.

4. Instead of pitting shareholders against stakeholders, we should recognize that they share a common interest in companies' wellbeing, financial success and sustainability.  Indeed, the new generation of millennials and GenX shareholders, together with leading institutional investors, such as BlackRock, are already asserting that ESG issues are integral to their evaluation of the companies they own.

5. We need to put an end to the pushback against ESG that is coming from a variety of sources, including academics, hardline capitalists and politicians.  Ideology and politics should not play a lead role when we are considering what is best for businesses, stakeholders and the capital markets.

6. It is time to reexamine the traditional prescriptive, investor-based definition of "materiality." ESG has made us aware that financial materiality needs to be addressed from multiple stakeholder perspectives.

An integrated approach to materiality can best be accomplished by companies internally, using what Uber Technologies in a comment letter to the SEC on climate change describes as an individual "company-specific materiality assessment"1 to supplement legal standards.  We need to admit what has always been true: companies, not regulators, ultimately decide what is material to their business.

 An integrated approach to materiality would require a more flexible legal definition, including a comply-or-explain option, that could accommodate "company-specific materiality."  ESG has had a transformative effect on companies, redefining the corporate social compact, highlighting the materiality of E, S and G issues and introducing important new criteria, such as corporate purpose and culture, human capital management and sustainability

 Companies are learning how to factor these issues into their business strategy and how to disclose them.  Investors, in turn, are adapting to these demands and looking more deeply into the inner workings of the companies they own.  

Standardization and comparability are still needed.  Regulators in the EU and the United States are not far behind with new laws and proposed new disclosure requirements.

The hope is that global regulators, NGOs and independent standard-setters, in collaboration with the IFRS Foundation and the ISSB, will work together to promulgate disclosure requirements that encourage an integrated approach to management and governance, thereby enabling companies to "tell their own story" to stakeholders and the capital markets.

Of course, the Caux Round Table simply proposes to modernize valuation methodology with the application of risk assessments of the management of stakeholders and the addition of human and social capital accounts to balance sheets.

The SEC is also investigating the asset-management arm of Goldman Sachs with respect to its ESG funds.  Regulators have concern that marketing ESG labeled funds can be a superficial way to sell financial products, not on the basis of sound risk analysis and realistic valuations, but more to address the status and reputation needs of investors to demonstrate their concern for climate change or diversity in the workplace.  Such funds facilitate the flow of capital to firms which take those concerns as their business objectives.

On the other hand, LG Chem believes that its investing in chemical recycling, biodegradables and renewable energy, in battery materials like carbon nanotubes and in new drugs for gout and some types of obesity, will find markets and drive profits.  It calls this strategy investing in "ESG values."

Professor Diane Coyle at the University of Cambridge writes that "the movement towards ESG reporting certainly highlights important issues ... But the belief that companies can solve such pressing issues – through pursing ESG standards or otherwise – is deeply flawed. ...At root, demanding that companies use ESG metrics would effectively be asking private companies to legislate social outcomes.  

The calls for companies to put social aims at the heart of their activities mean placing small numbers of executives in powerful political, economic and social roles.  But business leaders should not be left free to make what are, in fact, important collective decisions. ... Corporate executives should consider the moral aspects of every choice they make. But some of the questions raised about corporate responsibility and ESG reporting do run headlong into political choices."  (Foreign Affairs, Jan/February 2022)

Stephen B. Young, Global Executive Director CRT for Moral Capitalism

ESG: what are the goals? How to proceed work in progress?
Environmental risks created by business activities have actual or potential negative impact on air and land, water, ecosystems, and human health. ESG is to consider as an instrument, as a social contract between earthlings and earth to provide and maintain sustainability.

Our economies need to move away from corporate-profits only and zero-sum game for environment and social life. Although ESG is not a panacea and sometimes hijacked by companies to profile as sustainable, the three central factors in measuring the sustainability and societal impact of an investment in business are of influence on the economic system. But change start from and by people, not systems.

There's no central plan on how to proceed and on the work in progress of ESG. Many business sectors, government departments (Central government encourages sustainable energy | Renewable energy |, researchers, advisory services (eg. KPMG IMPACT | ESG and sustainability - KPMG Global (, policymakers (A critical look at the ESG market – CEPS), stock-markets, rating industries (which brings me to the question of: do countries’ ESG ratings have effect on their sovereign borrowing costs?) are concerned with the 3 factors.

But who determines the agenda and who takes the lead for an unambiguous approach?

Meanwhile, the importance of ESG within business has grown and better standards in order to contribute to a better environment and better working conditions are increasingly met. But there are still many barriers to overcome: legislation and regulation, definitions and determination of standards and correct explanations of outcomes and results.

In Europe there’s the Green Deal, which means step by step obligations for companies to focus on people, environment and societies: a part of this is the CSR Directive to embed sustainable objectives in the companies’ strategy (Corporate sustainability reporting | European Commission ( and to publish regular reports on the social and environmental impacts of their activities.

Do nothing is not an option: to limit further damage to the earth, there must be a tool (ESG or integrated reporting) to manage, to assess and to monitor impacts of our business operations on environment and societies. But we also have to contend paradoxes: when it is claimed that ESG measures environmental goodness by how little humans impact Earth, Sri Lanka has received an ESG score of 98 out of 100, while the country is broke: And Croatia will enter the eurozone 1-1-2023 but no data has been released on ESG ratings.

According to Nicholas J. Firzli, investment choices of pensionfunds, sovereign wealth funds and endowments are, to a large extent, guided and predetermined by the systematic use of old fashioned indices or benchmarks, designed by a small set of Anglo-American index providers, most notably MSCI (Morgan Stanley Capital International).

Outcome of COP26 has shown that financial institutions and corporates are integrated when ESG is challenged. Ignoring ESG not only could impact business profitability but also governments’ credibility, who can expand the balance of payments with an element for ESG.

Thus there is the need for change and urge to proceed work in progress. Setting materiality thresholds for ESG disclosures is sensible, as is working with fitting governance model(s) (designing-sustainability-governance-report-march2022.pdf (



the Business Forum

As the largest and most globally representative UN convening of business leaders, the SDG Business Forum – co-hosted by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), the UN Global Compact and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) – highlights companies that are using their influence as a positive agent of change in their local communities and across the world

Megalomaniac and mania behavior by the private sector, has public administration remained too far away? The document BUSINESS IN A DIFFERENT WAY? gives a view on business during operational activities: objectives, social interests, sustainability, compliance, thinking from the customer's mind and 'sharing', from which we cannot escape in the future. Also be discussed are preconditions for the business community to thrive and the impact of neoliberalism and capitalist values in its current form. Actually, the society deserves a new socio-economic model using innovative digital techniques. The blockchain (*) and associated technological changes can change that and let see an economy dominated by human capitalism and greater individual autonomy. Such change will massively disrupt current economic conditions. How that unfolds is unclear at present. But entrepreneurs and innovators will resolve uncertainty, as always, through a process of trial and error.

The UN Global Compact launched a web-based impact management tool to enable companies to learn about, manage and improve their sustainability performance. The interactive tool informs companies which SDGs matter most for their area of business and set goals for action. The SDG Action Manager was launched at the end of January 2020. Created by B Lab and the UN Global Compact, the Action Manager also brings together B Lab’s B Impact Assessment, the UN Global Compact’s Ten Principles and the SDGs to enable action through self-assessment, benchmarking and improvement. The tool aims to help companies: Learn which SDGs matter most to them based on their company profiles; Gain clarity on the ways in which operations, supply chains and business models can have positive impacts and identify risk areas for each SDG; and Set goals and track and improve their progress on the SDGs.

Systems - Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)   Designing Sustainability Governance  


Business in Europe

EU institutions and bodies
While modern and often successful, European business can't afford to stand still in the face of fast-moving technological change and ever-keener foreign competition. EU enterprise policy aims to ensure we keep up with our rivals while also creating jobs. It pays particular attention to the needs of the manufacturing industry and small firms.

The European Commission's Enterprise Europe Network too helps small business to make the most of the European marketplace.

Responding to calls from the Council and the Parliament, the Commission has announced a series of measures designed to target this vulnerable sector of society of unemployed young people aged under 25. Central to the Commission's Youth Employment Package is the concept of a Youth Guarantee. This proposal from the Commission is both timely and highly relevant. With Finland and Austria already implementing such measures, it is hoped the Commission will be able to get member states on board quickly. Implementation is likely to differ from state to state but the goal is the same, the provision of opportunity for Europe’s Youth.

The European Commission developed in 2010 an integrated industrial policy for the globalisation era in order to place industry in the centre to sustain Europe as an economic player on the word stage The policy sets out a strategy that aims to boost growth and jobs by maintaining and supporting a strong, diversified and competitive industrial base in Europe offering well-paid jobs while becoming more resource efficient

the convergence puzzle
in conclusion
Unlocking industrial opportunities is the 2013's name of the yearly event on policy formulation by providing a platform for high level debates on the optimal conditions for business development in Europe, which platform considered to be a key meeting place for business leaders, diplomats, the public sector and EU-policy makers.

The event, organised by European Business Summit (EBS), is focussing on Europe's need to re-industrialise in order to become more competitive and sustainable and enables participants to gain a bottom-up perspective about what companies want from EU policy makers and on encouraging business leaders to engage more with EU policy makers, to develop a real pan-EU business dialogue.

The conferensce is dynamic in the issue it tackles and its associated studies/surveys- ensuring the best possible outcomes for business participants and policy makers.

in an era of increased global competition, EBS aims at presenting

In April 2013, during the 4th Brussels Think Tank Dialogue, the policy was discussed. The Dialogue focused on the labour market potential of the Commission’s current strategy for a European industrial policy by elaborating on three main questions:
  1. What are the net employment effects of the “Third Industrial Revolution” the Commission strives for?
  2. What kind of labour markets and training policies does the EU need to address skill mismatches?
  3. And finally, to what extent are the employment benefits and costs of a integrated industrial policy equally distributed amongst member states and regions and what does this imply for mobility and migration within the EU?
The Commission argues that the Europeans need a coordinated policy response to tackle current economic challenges. From the Commission’s point of view, only better coordination of member states’ industrial policies and pooling available resources can make the EU a successful competitive player in the global market and mitigate internal competitiveness gaps between its member states.

The conference paper addresses the great diversity and heterogeneity of industrial structures and labour markets in EU member states, which considerably contribute to national rivalries, the structural East-West divide, and the grown core-periphery divide between Northern and Southern eurozone members.

There is a future for industrry and manufacturing, in which enterprises and starting and existing SME's are involved. But how to get people back into jobs? And what should happen and be done, if a shift from the West to the East occurs? Do we have enough approaches and enough integrated industrial policy to safeguard? And what about investments?

A global, independent business membership and research association working in the public interest to provide the world's leading organizations with the practical knowledge they need to improve their performance and better serve society.
The Conference Board is a global, independent business membership and research association working in the public interest. The mission is unique: To provide the world's leading organizations with the practical knowledge they need to improve their performance and better serve society.
Founded in 1916, The Conference Board is an objective, independent source of economic and business knowledge with one agenda: to help our member companies understand and deal with the most critical issues of our time

The Conference Board conduct research and convene business leaders in forums large and small, public and private. The insights captured through our extensive network feed directly back into our research and meeting agendas, ensuring that our activities remain sharply focused on the key issues of the day, works within and across four main subject areas – Corporate Leadership; Economies, Markets & Value Creation; High-Performing Organizations; and Human Capital – to create a unique, enterprise-wide perspective that helps business leaders respond today, anticipate tomorrow, and make the right strategic decisions every day and provide:

  • objective, world-renowned economic data and analyses that help business and policy leaders make sense of their operating environments;in-depth research and best practices concerning management, leadership, and corporate citizenship; public and private forums in which executives learn with and from their peers;
  • a platform and thought leadership for the business community worldwide.
Is Europe doing enough to fight the credit crisis?
Companies access to finance: a European action
BUSINESSEUROPE plays a crucial role in Europe as the main horizontal business organisation at EU level. Through its 41 member federations, BUSINESSEUROPE represents more than 20 million companies from 35 countries. Its main task is to ensure that companies' interests are represented and defended vis-à-vis the European institutions with the principal aim of preserving and strengthening corporate competitiveness. BUSINESSEUROPE is active in the European social dialogue to promote the smooth functioning of labour markets.

In a policy document presented on 26 June 2012, BUSINESSEUROPE and all its members urge to take all the necessary decisions without further delay to restore confidence and put Europe back on track. In its five-point plan 'Growing out of the crisis' BUSINESSEUROPE presents concrete measures to:

  • Safeguard the euro: All possible means must be used to safeguard the euro;
  • Improve public finances and speed up structural reforms: Only when businesses and households are sure that governments have fully committed to putting their public finances on a sustainable path, will they have the confidence to invest, recruit workers and increase consumption;
    Promote private investment: Europe needs a stronger investment and competitiveness agenda to build prive-sector trust and confidence;
    Unleash the single market: The single market adds EUR 600 a year to our economy. Since 1992 it has helped create almost 3 million new jobs across the EU, and benefited the broader European Economic Area;
  • Expand EU external trade: With almost 30 million EU jobs (more than 10% of the EU workforce) dependent upon export markets outside the EU, Europe needs to build a strong presence in expanding global markets.

This strategy will allow Europe to double its long-term annual growth rate from 1.25% to 2.5%.

Eurociett was established as the European Confederation of Private Employment Agencies to promote common interests of the agency work industry in Europe. The confederation brings together 31 national federations of the private employment agency industry in Europe, and 7  of the largest, multinational staffing companies worldwide.

This is done especially by:

  • seeking greater recognition for the contribution that private employment agencies make to better functioning labour markets, especially in relation to three key aspects: job creation, access to and integration in the labour market of diverse groups of workers, economic growth and tax revenues;

    creating the most suitable regulatory environment for the industry in Europe;

    supporting the European policy objective of increasing EU’s competitiveness, growth and employment;

    raising quality standards for the industry and fighting against rogue providers;

  • improving the image of the industry and strengthening its reputation.


UEAPME is the employers’ organisation representing the interests of European crafts, trades and SMEs at EU level. UEAPME is a recognised European Social Partner. It is a non-profit seeking and non-partisan organisation. As the European SME umbrella organisation, UEAPME incorporates 84 member organisations from 34 countries consisting of national cross-sectorial SME federations, European branch federations and other associate members, which support the SME family. UEAPME represents more than 12 million enterprises, which employ around 55 million people across Europe.

BDI (Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie), a wide network in Germany and Europe in all important markets and international organizations, which provides political back-up for the opening up of international markets and it offers information and economic policy advice on all topics relevant to industry, published in November 2011 the study 'Germany 2030 Future Perspective for Value Creation. The results of this study go beyond the extrapolation of trends or the condensing of existing studies on future research. The analysis focuses on the disruptions and possible developments which could have a major impact on the manner and the extent of what we (in Germany) produce and consume.

What radical technological, economic and social changes can be expected by 2030 and what possible effects can they have on value creation and jobs in Germany? How can the opportunities be grasped and the risks minimised? How should the overall political framework be devised, especially with regard to the promotion of research?

The CBI's mission to promote the conditions in which businesses of all sizes and sectors in the UK can compete and prosper for the benefit of all. To achieve this, campaigning is in the UK, the EU and internationally for a competitive policy landscape. The CBI is the UK's premier business lobbying organisation, providing a voice for employers at a national and international level to provide a voice for businesspeople and their businesses on a national and international level. "We speak for more than 240,000 companies of every size, including many in the FTSE 100 and FTSE 350, mid-caps, SMEs, micro businesses, private and family owned businesses, start ups, and trade associations..."'…and in every sector, including agriculture, automotive, aerospace and defence, construction, creative and communications, financial services, IT and e-business, management consultancy, manufacturing, professional services, retail, transport, tourism and utilities".
Confederation of British Industry

ERT today brings together up to 50 chief executives and chairmen of major multinational companies of European parentage, covering a wide range of industrial sectors. Individuals join at the personal invitation of existing Members, which confers on ERT membership a personal rather than corporate character.

ERT's vision report
ERT Members meet twice a year, in person, at Plenary Sessions. At these Plenary Sessions, Members determine ERT’s work programme, set priorities and establish specialised Working Groups to work on them. Decisions are taken by consensus.


Small business act for Europe  
To improve the overall approach to entrepreneurship, to irreversibly anchor the ´Think Small First´ principle in policy making from regulation to public service and to promote SME´s growth by helping them tackle the remaining problems which hamper their development, it was questioned in March 2010 if a Small business act for Europe is needed.

It is the time, once and for all, to cement the needs of SME´s in the forefront of the EU´s policy. The SBA brings the full weight of Europe behind SME´s - enlisting all the resources of Europe to help small business in their daily business and to clear the path for those that want to create more jobs and grow in Europe and beyond.´

The idea is to create a strong more accessible environment for SME's. Key recommendations are ade in the report on categories 'definition of SMILEs and policy', 'proportionate offering and listing requirements', 'proportionate on-going requirements', 'market integrity', 'investor's interest for SMILEs' and, 'Think Small - Act Big".

Mme C. Lagarde at CEPS


(*) A blockchain is a distributed database that maintains a continuously-growing list of ordered records called blocks. Blockchain is the foundation for the second era of the internet – an internet of value, where anything of value, including money, our identities, cultural assets like music, and even a vote can be stored, managed, transacted, and moved in a secure, private way. Blockchains and tokens can play a crucial role in the infrastructure layer of our digital economy and is poised to transform every industry and managerial function —redefining the way we make transactions, share ideas, and manage workflow. They offer an alternative to the current practice in which important parts of the information and communication infrastructure are proprietary: owned by corporates, governmental organizations, unicorns and (aspiring) startups. This infrastructure works much better in our globalized, interconnected society when it is “commonized”, i.e. when it becomes part of the digital commons. A commonized infrastructure provides a completely new level playing field for creating and delivering added value and thus for private companies to compete and flourish.

To further adoption of blockchain technology, the Global Blockchain Business Council (GBBC) brings together innovators and thought-leaders from over 50 countries by engaging and educating regulators, business leaders, and lawmakers on how to harness this groundbreaking technology to create more secure, equitable, and functional societies. The Council helps entrepreneurs and enterprises grow blockchain businesses, promotes diversity in blockchain, and provides blockchain education.