Joseph Stiglitz 隻有政府才能拯救資本主義

 

相信隻有政府才能拯救資本主義的經濟學家

An Economist Who Believes Only Government Can Save Capitalism

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/10/books/review/joseph-e-stiglitz-people-power-profits.html

書評 作者：丹尼爾·W·德雷茲納 2019年5月10日

PEOPLE, POWER, AND PROFITS, Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent
人員、權力和利潤, 不滿時代的進步資本主義 By Joseph E. Stiglitz

我們都感覺到美國經濟及其政府向大企業傾斜，但正如約瑟夫·E·斯蒂格利茨在他的新書《人民、權力和利潤》中所解釋的那樣，情況很嚴峻。 少數公司已經主導了整個經濟部門，導致不平等加劇和增長緩慢。 這就是金融業成功製定自己的法規的方式，科技公司在幾乎沒有監督的情況下積累了大量個人數據，以及我們的政府談判的貿易協議未能代表工人的最大利益的方式。 太多人通過剝削他人而不是通過創造財富來獲得財富。 如果不采取措施，新技術可能會讓情況變得更糟，加劇不平等和失業。

斯蒂格利茨認為，財富和生活水平提高的真正來源是基於學習、科學技術的進步以及法治。 他表明，對司法機構、大學和媒體的攻擊破壞了長期以來構成美國經濟實力和民主基礎的機構。

盡管我們今天可能感到無助，但我們遠非無能為力。 事實上，經濟解決方案往往是非常明確的。 我們需要利用市場的好處，同時抑製市場的過度行為，確保市場為我們——美國公民——服務，而不是相反。 如果有足夠多的公民團結起來支持本書中概述的變革議程，那麽創建一個能夠重建共同繁榮的進步資本主義可能還為時不晚。 斯蒂格利茨展示了如何讓所有人再次過上中產階級生活。

對自由市場原教旨主義可預見的危險和進步資本主義的基礎《人民、權力和利潤》的權威描述向我們展示了陷入危機的美國，但也為我們度過這個充滿挑戰的時代指明了道路。

We all have the sense that the American economy—and its government—tilts toward big business, but as Joseph E. Stiglitz explains in his new book, People, Power, and Profits, the situation is dire. A few corporations have come to dominate entire sectors of the economy, contributing to skyrocketing inequality and slow growth. This is how the financial industry has managed to write its own regulations, tech companies have accumulated reams of personal data with little oversight, and our government has negotiated trade deals that fail to represent the best interests of workers. Too many have made their wealth through exploitation of others rather than through wealth creation. If something isn’t done, new technologies may make matters worse, increasing inequality and unemployment.

Stiglitz identifies the true sources of wealth and of increases in standards of living, based on learning, advances in science and technology, and the rule of law. He shows that the assault on the judiciary, universities, and the media undermines the very institutions that have long been the foundation of America’s economic might and its democracy.

Helpless though we may feel today, we are far from powerless. In fact, the economic solutions are often quite clear. We need to exploit the benefits of markets while taming their excesses, making sure that markets work for us—the U.S. citizens—and not the other way around. If enough citizens rally behind the agenda for change outlined in this book, it may not be too late to create a progressive capitalism that will recreate a shared prosperity. Stiglitz shows how a middle-class life can once again be attainable by all.

An authoritative account of the predictable dangers of free market fundamentalism and the foundations of progressive capitalism, People, Power, and Profits shows us an America in crisis, but also lights a path through this challenging time.

<<<<<<>>>>>>

在華盛頓共識的鼎盛時期，繞城公路的一項有趣的消遣就是溫和地嘲笑約瑟夫·E·斯蒂格利茨。 專家們很容易放棄他享有盛譽的獎項（諾貝爾經濟學獎）和職位（世界銀行首席經濟學家、比爾·克林頓經濟顧問委員會主席），並認為他關於“市場原教旨主義”的警告是過分誇張的。 2004 年，金融專欄作家塞巴斯蒂安·馬拉比 (Sebastian Mallaby) 將斯蒂格利茨描述為“就像一個男孩，在一棟精致的房子的地板上發現了一個洞，然後不斷地大喊大叫並指著它。”十五年後，資本主義建造的房子顯得相當破舊。 也許，隻是也許，更多的人應該認真對待斯蒂格利茨。

這無疑正是現為哥倫比亞大學經濟學教授的斯蒂格利茨在他的最新著作《人民、權力和利潤》中所希望達到的目標。 他認為美國的資本主義體係已經崩潰，需要政府的幫助才能重新站起來。 《人、權力和利潤》建立在斯蒂格利茨早期作品的基礎上，並增加了一些相當大的野心。 他在序言中寫道：“這是一個重大變革的時代。 漸進主義——對我們的政治和經濟體係的微小調整——不足以完成手頭的任務。” 他在引言中補充道：“失敗的不僅僅是經濟，還有我們的政治。 我們的經濟分歧導致了政治分歧，而政治分歧又加劇了經濟分歧。”

斯蒂格利茨對美國經濟問題的診斷對於任何關注這些辯論的人來說都會有熟悉的感覺。 遊戲規則有利於富人而不是窮人。這加劇了經濟不平等，並增加了各行業領先企業的市場力量集中度，從而減緩了廣泛的生產率增長。 這些公司和富有的個人正在將他們的財富轉化為政治權力，進一步修改規則以鞏固他們的最高地位。 他們主張減稅並放鬆對除知識產權之外的一切事物的管製。 任何依賴公共教育、工會或社會安全網等反補貼機構的人都會遭受損失。

“人、權力和利潤”超越了診斷和治療。 斯蒂格利茨計劃的核心是加強國家實力。 “認為政府是問題而非解決方案的觀點是完全錯誤的。 相反，我們社會的許多（如果不是大部分）問題，從過度汙染到金融不穩定和經濟不平等，都是由市場造成的。” 他提出了一係列改革，包括對基礎研究等公共產品的大量投資、對企業更嚴格的監管以及維護和保護投票權的措施。

《人民、權力和利潤》的一個殘酷諷刺是，在主張自由市場已經衰落的同時，斯蒂格利茨正在一個極其擁擠的市場中競爭。 類型為“美國出了什麽問題？” 過於擁擠； 我們生活在一個作家告訴美國人我們不再生活在黃金時代的黃金時代。 鑒於關於這個主題的書籍太多，斯蒂格利茨的書是否脫穎而出？

他的書的相對優勢之一是，雖然斯蒂格利茨擁有無可挑剔的經濟資曆，但他也認識到他的職業的一些盲點。 他正確地觀察到，標準經濟學教科書大量談論競爭，但很少談論經濟實力。 他還擅長駁斥關於市場奇跡和政府失敗的陳詞濫調。 例如，他指出，社會保障管理局在支付退休福利方麵比私人養老金更有效率。

然而，如果斯蒂格利茨將注意力集中在政策袋中最尖銳的論點上，他可能會做得更好。 例如，他討論了對碳或金融交易征稅“可以同時提高經濟績效和增加收入”的想法。 這聽起來像是拉弗曲線的進步二重身，也就是說，這個概念將是良好的政策和良好的政治。 斯蒂格利茨應該把它賣掉； 相反，他在一頁裏輕鬆瀏覽了一遍。

他的其他一些想法似乎不太經過深思熟慮，或者更具政治毒性。 例如，在反壟斷方麵，他鼓勵先發製人的原則：“對合並的監管必須考慮到市場未來可能的形態。” 這需要相當大的遠見，因此斯蒂格利茨在 75 頁後承認了一個問題：“關於市場將向何處發展，往往沒有完美的信息，而世界卻與我們的預期不同。” 他未能解釋監管機構將如何處理這一難題。 斯蒂格利茨的另一個想法是建立一個可以使用個人國稅局的公共抵押貸款融資係統。 和社會保障數據——在當前低信任度的政治環境中聽起來令人不快。

事實上，我希望斯蒂格利茨認真對待他認真對待政治的承諾。 在某種程度上，“人民、權力和利潤”排除了普遍基本收入的想法，因為必要的增稅在政治上是不切實際的。 這是書中唯一一次斯蒂格利茨似乎在思考任何漸進的政策改革如何用經濟學的語言來說是“激勵相容的”。 沒有討論任何民意調查數據或其他指標來衡量公眾對他的想法的支持程度。

每一位 2020 年民主黨總統候選人的政策中心都應該明智地仔細研究“人民、權力和利潤”並挑選最好的想法。 其他讀者應該隨意更廣泛地瀏覽該類型。

丹尼爾·W·德雷茲納 (Daniel W. Drezner) 是弗萊徹法律與外交學院國際政治學教授。 他的最新著作是《創意產業：悲觀主義者、黨派人士和財閥如何改變創意市場》。

人員、權力和利潤
不滿時代的進步資本主義
作者：約瑟夫·E·斯蒂格利茨
371頁。W.W. 諾頓公司。 27.95 美元。

人民、權力和利潤：不滿時代的進步資本主義

People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent

https://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/book-review/people-power 

約瑟夫·斯蒂格利茨 2019 年 4 月 23 日
         
審稿人：克雷格·R·羅奇

約瑟夫·E·斯蒂格利茨是美國頂尖的經濟學家之一。 他是諾貝爾經濟學獎獲得者，曾任克林頓總統經濟顧問委員會主席、世界銀行首席經濟學家。 正如他 95 頁的腳注中列出的數百個來源所證明的那樣，他是一位多產的作家，讀者廣泛。

鑒於這些憑據，讀者可能會對他在書中使用的激烈的黨派言論感到驚訝。 斯蒂格利茨顯然不是特朗普總統或任何共和黨政治家或商人的粉絲。 他寫道，“絕大多數共和黨人都讚同特朗普的偏執、厭女症、本土主義和保護主義”，並且對增加預算赤字表示滿意，以贏得“對富人和企業的減稅以及放鬆管製”。 他認為美國正在“演變成 1% 的經濟體和民主國家，為 1% 的人服務，為 1% 的人服務”。

斯蒂格利茨在書的結尾處寫道，他的目的是提出“另一種議程——人們可以稱之為進步議程……”，他揭示了對黨派言論的一種解釋。 。 。 我相信這可以成為新民主黨的共識。”

為了製定這一議程，斯蒂格利茨對美國資本主義的失敗提出了廣泛的聲明，並提出了一係列政策來解決這些失敗。 不過，他的論點有時也會出現令人驚訝的地方。 例如，斯蒂格利茨建議我們“駁斥這樣一種觀點，即因為美國贏得了冷戰，美國的經濟體係（自由市場資本主義）就取得了勝利。”

他認為，“與其說自由市場資本主義已經證明了其優越性，不如說共產主義失敗了。” 更令人驚訝的是，他認為中國“有中國特色的社會主義市場經濟”為美國提供了一種充滿活力的替代願景。 他的結論是“我們需要埋葬我們對經濟體係的傲慢態度。”

斯蒂格利茨指出，經濟增長緩慢是美國資本主義的失敗之一。 他表示，美國的經濟增長已從1947年至1980年的每年3.7%放緩至1980年至2017年的每年2.7%。他還指出，美國的人均GDP並未位居世界前列。 美國中央情報局報告稱，按照購買力平價計算的人均GDP，美國排名世界第19位。

然而，這份名單並不是同類比較，因為沒有一個國家的規模和多樣性能超過美國。 中央情報局的數據將列支敦士登、卡塔爾、挪威和科威特等國家排在美國之前。斯蒂格利茨所描述的中國是“動態替代”，根據中央情報局的數據，中國排名第 105 位，人均 GDP 比美國低 72%。 斯蒂格利茨還看到了中國的其他積極因素：“中國現在是世界上最大的經濟體……” 。 。 它現在比美國儲蓄更多、製造更多、貿易更多。”

美國資本主義的其他經濟失敗包括“未能很好地處理從製造業經濟向服務業經濟的轉型，未能馴服金融部門，未能妥善管理全球化及其後果，最重要的是，未能應對日益嚴重的不平等” ”。

這些失敗的原因是什麽？ 斯蒂格利茨強烈地認為，主要原因是“從市場力量開始的剝削？” 市場集中度導致市場力量，斯蒂格利茨提供的數據顯示集中度不斷增加。

他寫道，“我們在有線電視、互聯網或電話服務方麵麵臨的有限選擇中看到了這一點。 三家公司在社交網站上占有 89% 的市場份額，在家居裝修商店上占有 87% 的市場份額，”等等。 此外，金融還引發了嚴重的問題，斯蒂格利茨寫道，“金融是造成當今經濟、社會和政治困境的核心。”

應該采取什麽措施來解決美國資本主義的這些失敗？ 從廣義上講，斯蒂格利茨主張在任何時候都需要更多的政府，因為資本主義導致了“太多的汙染、不平等和失業，但基礎研究卻太少”。 此外，他認為政府必須監管私人市場：“原因很簡單：一個人的行為會影響他人，如果沒有監管，這些影響就不會被考慮在內。”

斯蒂格利茨呼籲加強政府的六項具體變化：需要投資於知識、規劃城市化、應對全球氣候變化； 應對日益複雜的經濟； 應對經濟變革； 並管理全球化。

斯蒂格利茨的一連串政策建議涵蓋了很多領域，其中一些建議比其他建議更詳細、表述更清楚。 例如，他指出“近幾十年來的問題是勞動力參與率和生產率都表現不佳。” 對於勞動力參與，他提出了更多“家庭友好政策”，例如“更好的家庭休假政策”。

對於生產力而言，“壟斷企業創新的動力較小”，因此“遏製市場力量”成為議程的一部分。 斯蒂格利茨多次討論了針對壟斷的反壟斷政策。 值得注意的是，他認為我們不希望允許高度集中的公司通過收購來“阻止競爭”。 在這種背景下，他建議政府可能會更仔細地審視 Facebook，並要求其“剝離 Instagram 和 WhatsApp”。

至於解決不平等問題，斯蒂格利茨列舉了提高最低工資和提高所得稅抵免等政策。 他最廣泛、或許也是最激進的政策建議是創建“公共選擇”。 他表示，“通過公共選擇，政府創建了一個替代性的基本計劃來提供健康保險、退休年金或抵押貸款等產品。” 他寫道，“公共部門和私營部門之間的競爭將打破市場力量的後盾。”

最終，斯蒂格利茨認為，投資於“知識、學習和科學技術進步”是“一個國家財富的真正來源”。 他以罕見的、積極的語氣結束了演講，得出的結論是“現在拯救資本主義還為時不晚。”

克雷格·R·羅奇 (Craig R. Roach) 是一位敘事非小說類作家。 他的著作《簡單電氣化：從本傑明·富蘭克林到埃隆·馬斯克改變了世界的技術》（BenBella Books，2017 年）榮獲 2018 年 Axiom 商業圖書獎金獎。

An Economist Who Believes Only Government Can Save Capitalism

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/10/books/review/joseph-e-stiglitz-people-power-profits.html?

By Daniel W. Drezner  May 10, 2019

PEOPLE, POWER, AND PROFITS
Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent
By Joseph E. Stiglitz

Joseph E. StiglitzCredit...Stephanie Mei-Ling for The New York Times

A diverting Beltway pastime during the heyday of the Washington Consensus was to gently mock Joseph E. Stiglitz. It was remarkably easy for pundits to wave away his prestigious awards (Nobel Prize in Economics) and positions (World Bank chief economist, chairman of Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers) and dismiss his warnings about “market fundamentalism” as overripe hyperbole. In 2004 the financial columnist Sebastian Mallaby described Stiglitz as “like a boy who discovers a hole in the floor of an exquisite house and keeps shouting and pointing at it.” Fifteen years later, the house that capitalism built looks rather shabby. Maybe, just maybe, more people should have taken Stiglitz seriously.

This is certainly what Stiglitz, now a professor of economics at Columbia, is hoping for with his latest book, “People, Power, and Profits.” He argues that the American system of capitalism has fallen down and needs government help to get back up again. “People, Power, and Profits” builds on Stiglitz’s earlier work and adds some pretty big ambitions. In the preface, he writes: “This is a time for major changes. Incrementalism — minor tweaks to our political and economic system — are inadequate to the tasks at hand.” In the introduction, he adds: “It is not just economics that has been failing but also our politics. Our economic divide has led to a political divide, and the political divide has reinforced the economic divide.”

Stiglitz’s diagnosis of what ails the American economy will have a familiar ring to anyone who has followed these debates. The rules of the game have been stacked in favor of the haves over the have-nots. This has widened economic inequality and increased the concentration of market power among leading firms in every sector, slowing down broad-based productivity growth. These firms and wealthy individuals are converting their riches into political power, further revising the rules to entrench their position at the top. They advocate for tax cuts and the deregulation of everything except intellectual property rights. Anyone who relies on countervailing institutions, like public education, labor unions or social safety nets, loses out.

“People, Power, and Profits” goes beyond diagnosis to treatment. At the core of Stiglitz’s plan is the strengthening of the state. “The view that government is the problem, not the solution, is simply wrong. To the contrary, many if not most of our society’s problems, from the excesses of pollution to financial instability and economic inequality, have been created by markets.” He proposes a whole host of reforms, including significant investments in public goods like basic research, more stringent regulation of firms and measures to preserve and protect the voting franchise.

A cruel irony of “People, Power, and Profits” is that in arguing the free market has declined, Stiglitz is competing in an extremely crowded marketplace. The genre of “How has America gone wrong?” is overstuffed; we are living in a golden age of authors telling Americans that we no longer live in a golden age. Given the plethora of books on this topic, does Stiglitz’s stand out?

One of his book’s comparative advantages is that while Stiglitz has impeccable economic credentials, he also recognizes some of his profession’s blind spots. He observes, correctly, that standard textbook economics talks a lot about competition but little about economic power. He also excels at swatting away bromides about the miracles of markets and the failures of governments. He notes, for example, that the Social Security Administration is far more efficient at disbursing retirement benefits than private pensions.

Stiglitz could have done much better, however, if he had narrowed his focus to the sharpest arguments in his policy quiver. For instance, he discusses the idea that taxes on carbon or financial transactions “can simultaneously increase economic performance and raise revenue.” This sounds like the progressive doppelgänger of the Laffer Curve, that is, a concept that would be good policy and good politics. Stiglitz should be selling the hell out of it; instead, he breezes through it in one page.

Some of his other ideas seem less thought out or more politically toxic. On antitrust, for example, he encourages a doctrine of pre-emption: “Regulation of mergers must take into account the likely future shape of markets.” This would require considerable foresight, so it is a problem that 75 pages later Stiglitz allows that “often there is far from perfect information about where a market will be evolving, and the world turns out to be different from what we expected.” He fails to explain how regulators would handle this conundrum. Another of Stiglitz’s ideas — a public mortgage financing system that could access an individual’s I.R.S. and Social Security data — sounds unpalatable in the current low-trust political environment.

Indeed, I wish Stiglitz had taken seriously his pledge to take politics seriously. At one point, “People, Power, and Profits” rules out the idea of a universal basic income because the necessary tax increases would be politically impractical. That was the only moment in the book in which Stiglitz seemed to think at all about how any progressive policy reform would be, to use the language of economics, “incentive compatible.” There is no discussion whatsoever of polling data or other metrics to gauge public support for his ideas.

The policy shop of every 2020 Democratic candidate for president would be wise to pore over “People, Power, and Profits” and cherry-pick its best ideas. Other readers should feel free to browse the genre a bit more widely.

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. His most recent book is “The Ideas Industry: How Pessimists, Partisans, and Plutocrats Are Transforming the Marketplace of Ideas.”

People, Power, and Profits: Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent

https://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/book-review/people-power

Joseph E. Stiglitz April 23, 2019
         
Reviewed by: Craig R. Roach

Joseph E. Stiglitz is one of America’s top economists. He is the winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics and served as the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers for President Clinton as well as the chief economist for the World Bank. As evidenced by the hundreds of sources listed in his 95 pages of footnotes, he is a prolific writer and widely read.

Given these credentials, readers might be surprised by the heated, partisan rhetoric he employs throughout his book. Stiglitz clearly is not a fan of President Trump or just about any Republican politician or businessperson. He writes that “the vast majority of the [Republican] party went along with Trump’s bigotry, misogyny, nativism, and protectionism,” and were fine with increased budget deficits, to win “tax cuts for the rich and corporations, and deregulation.” He opines that America is “evolving into an economy and democracy of the 1 percent, for the 1 percent and by the 1 percent.”

Stiglitz reveals one explanation for the partisan rhetoric when he writes near the end of his book that his intent is to present “an alternative agenda—one might call it the progressive agenda . . . that I believe can serve as a consensus for a renewed Democratic Party.”

To create that agenda Stiglitz puts forth a wide-ranging statement on the failures of American capitalism, and he offers a litany of policies to address those failures. Again, though, he sometimes goes to surprising places with his arguments. For example, Stiglitz recommends that we “dismiss the view that because the US won the Cold War, America’s economic system [free-market capitalism] had triumphed.”

He argues that “it was not so much that free-market capitalism had demonstrated its superiority but that communism had failed.” Even more surprising is his view that China’s “‘socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics,’ has provided a dynamic alternative vision to that of America.” He concludes that “we need to bury our arrogance about our economic system.”

Stiglitz points to slow economic growth as one of the failures of American capitalism. He states that America’s economic growth has slowed from 3.7% per year from 1947 to 1980, to 2.7% per year from 1980 to 2017. He notes, too, that America’s per capita GDP is not the top ranked in the world. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency reports that, based on GDP per capita on a purchasing power parity basis, the U.S. ranks 19th in the world.

This list, however, is not an apples to apples comparison, as no country as large or diverse ranks above the U.S.; the CIA data lists countries like Liechtenstein, Qatar, Norway, and Kuwait ahead of the U.S. China described by Stiglitz as a “dynamic alternative” is ranked 105th according to the CIA with a per capita GDP that was 72 percent less than the U.S. Still, Stiglitz sees other positives for China: “China is now the largest economy in the world . . . it now saves more than the US, manufactures more, and trades more.”

Other economic failures for American capitalism include “the failure to handle well the transition from a manufacturing economy to a service-sector economy, to tame the financial sector, to properly manage globalization and its consequences, and most importantly, to respond to the growing inequality.”

What are the causes of these failures? Stiglitz feels strongly that chief among the causes is “exploitation, beginning with market power?” Market concentration leads to market power and Stiglitz offers data showing increasing concentration.

He writes that “we see it in the limited choices we face for cable TV or the Internet or telephone services. Three firms have an 89 percent market share in social networking sites, 87 percent in home improvement stores,” and so on. In addition, finance caused serious problems, and Stiglitz writes that “finance was central to the creation of today’s economic, social, and political malaise.”

What should be done to address these failures of American capitalism? Broadly, Stiglitz makes a case for more government at every turn because capitalism has led to “too much pollution, inequality, and unemployment, but too little basic research.” Moreover, he argues that government must regulate private markets: “the reason is simple: what one person does affects others, and without regulations those effects won’t be taken into account.”

Six specific changes motivate Stiglitz’s call for more government: the need to invest in knowledge, plan for urbanization, combat global climate change; deal with an increasingly complex economy; address economic change; and manage globalization.

Stiglitz covers a lot of territory with his litany of policy proposals and some proposals are more detailed and more clearly stated than others. For example, he states that “the trouble in recent decades is that neither labor force participation nor productivity have been doing well.” For labor participation he proposes more “family-friendly policies” such as “better family leave policy.”

For productivity, “monopolies have less incentive to innovate,” so “curbing market power” is part of the agenda. Stiglitz discusses antitrust policy aimed at monopolies at several points. Notably, he argues that we do not want to allow highly concentrated firms to “forestall competition” through acquisitions. In this context he suggests the government might look at Facebook more carefully and require it to “divest itself of Instagram and WhatsApp.”  

As to fixing inequality, Stiglitz cites policies such as a higher minimum wage and a higher earned income tax credit. His broadest and, perhaps, most aggressive policy proposals are to create a “pubic option.” He states that “with a public option, the government creates an alternative, basic program to provide products like health insurance, retirement annuities, or mortgages.” He writes that “competition between the public and private sectors will break the back of market power.”

Ultimately, Stiglitz believes that investing in “knowledge, learning, and advances in science and technology” are the “true source of a country’s wealth.” He closes on a rare, positive note concluding that “it is still not too late to save capitalism from itself.”

Craig R. Roach is an author of narrative nonfiction. His book Simply Electrifying: The Technology that Transformed the World, from Benjamin Franklin to Elon Musk (BenBella Books, 2017) won a 2018 Axiom Business Book Award Gold Medal.