Sentences with phrase «gdp per»

The top two markets, Greeley, Colo. and Midland - Odessa, Texas posted metro GDP per capita growth rates of 11.6 percent and 10.9 percent respectively.

Here are the 10 states with the fastest growth in real GDP per capita since 2000:

Unfortunately a lot of the migration is coming from retirees which doesn't do a whole lot for the job market, GDP per capita, or wage growth.

Second, we sought to determine whether the frequency of S allele carriers predicts cultural individualism and collectivism by conducting a multiple regression analysis with individualism — collectivism as the criterion variable and frequency of S allele carriers, as well as four other economic and health factors previously associated with individualism — collectivism including GDP per capita, inequity in the distribution of wealth (Gini index) as well as historical and contemporary pathogen prevalence as predictor variables (Fincher et al. 2008).

Even when Japan remains as one of the most developed countries in the world, its GDP per capita has decreased compared to previous years.

These four countries alone produced over 800 billion dollars of GDP per year.

While Yemeksepeti had a huge number of orders, Turkey has a GDP per capita of $ 14,071 USD and 80 million people.

Over a 10 - year period, student loan debt cancellation could contribute an average of about $ 94 billion in GDP per year, according to one model, and $ 25 billion per year according to the other.

OECD data on labour productivity (GDP per hour worked) suggests that greater productivity is realized with shorter hours.

For the vast majority of that time period, the commerce and industry of the north (powered to a great extent by hydro power prior to the widespread adoption of coal as a fossil fuel) produced much higher GDP per capita than the agricultural economies of the South, particularly because the infamous «three - fifths compromise» that gave the South Congressional representation based in part upon the number of slaves who lived there (30 % or more of the population of many states) did not apply to capitation taxes.

Saddler said Turkey's per capita emissions were less than a quarter of Australia's, and its GDP per head less.

Based on the IPCC assumptions, South Africa ends up with a GDP per capita far in excess of the United States by the year 2100.

Thus, until the last century, population and GDP per capita were low enough that the Human System remained a relatively small component of the Earth System.

A similar pattern holds for GDP per capita, but with the acceleration of growth occurring even more recently (see Fig. 1) and with the distribution of consumption becoming much more unequal.

The 45 lowest income countries are projected to grow to ∼ $ 6,500 GDP per capita by 2100 [104] but the average GDP per capita of today's high - income countries is ∼ $ 45,000.

However, both population and GDP per capita experienced explosive growth, especially after ∼ 1950, and the product of these two growths — total human impact — has grown from relatively small to dominant in the Earth System.

Note that the contribution from population growth has been relatively steady, while the contribution from the relative change in GDP per capita has been much more variable from year to year (even negative for some years).

Specifically, key parameters of the Human System, such as fertility, health, migration, economic inequality, unemployment, GDP per capita, resource use per capita, and emissions per capita, must depend on the dynamic variables of the Human — Earth coupled system.26 Not including these feedbacks would be like trying to make El Niño predictions using dynamic atmospheric models but with sea surface temperatures as an external input based on future projections independently produced (e.g., by the UN) without feedbacks.

It has a population of 3.2 million and is one of the poorest nations on earth with GDP per capita of just $ 1,000, partly a result of the civil war that seethed there for 14 years and left 150,000 people dead.

The Review proposes that 1 % of global GDP per annum is required to be invested to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

Discount rate - The degree to which consumption now is preferred to consumption one year hence, with prices held constant, but average incomes rising in line with GDP per capita.

Based on our analysis (which is not an HSBC economics forecast), we estimate that Chinese GDP per capita could reach those levels around 2030 (chart 1).

Xie Zhenhua, China's chief climate negotiator, suggested that China's emissions could peak when its GDP per capita was around half that of when developed countries» emissions peaked.

I mean, emissions must go up with population and with GDP per capita, and go down with energy efficiency.

Rather than use complex composite metrics which are difficult to justify and explain, we should focus on simple metrics like GDP per - capita.

The reference scenario accounts the UN's medium fertility population projections, historical GDP per capita rates that converge over time to be consistent with other integrated assessment models, and GHG per capita projections for each gas that reflect trends over the last decade for CO2 and follow RCP8.5 for the non-CO2 greenhouse gases.

A global policy on climate change would have to suit people from economies where GDP per capita range between orders of magnitude.

The two regions that the IIASA experts projected to have the highest rates of GDP per capita growth between 1975 and 2000 in both of their scenarios — the USSR / Eastern Europe and Middle East / North Africa — turned out to be the two regions which experienced NEGATIVE growth in output per head for the period.

«It states that total emission level can be expressed as the product of four inputs: population, GDP per capita, energy use per unit of GDP, carbon emissions per unit of energy consumed.»

Ethiopia's GDP per capita in 2013 was US$ 498.

We have very high levels of GDP per person, especially after dodging the GFC bullet, and compared with nations that have been making efforts over the last decade or two we have a great deal of low - hanging fruit just waiting to be picked.

In order to measure the capability of a country, the proposed ERF uses the indicator of GDP per - capita, but use it based on «purchasing power parity» (PPP) rather than on «market exchange rates» (MER).

Disaster costs are reducing per GDP per capita: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/disasters-cost-more-than-ever-but-not-because-of-climate-change/.

The Stern Review estimated that a global effort to mitigate climate change could save 20 % of GDP per year by 2050.

IPCC CO2 emission scenarios are built on a hypothesis of about 3 % economic growth up to 2100, with the poorest countries having their GDP / capita reaching to today's US GDP per capita.

The total capital cost over the decade is $ 370 billion, or 3 % of GDP per year.

Damage from wind, storm surge and inland flooding already amounts to 6 % of GDP per year in some countries, according to the study's preliminary results.

«Since the passage of AB 32 in 2006,» Next 10 founder F. Noel Perry writes, «California's GDP per capita has grown by nearly $ 5,000 per person — nearly double the national average — while California emissions per capita dropped by 12 percent.»

India has very ambitious projects underway to build huge solar plants right now but it is a very poor country with a GDP per capita 3 % that of the US, just $ 1700 per year, so it's hardly unreasonable that they get help to transition away from coal fired power.

Although Switzerland's per capita CO2 emissions (including LULUCF) are 6.55 tCO2 - lower than the EU at 9.3 tCO2 or the US at 20.22 tCO2 it has one of the world's highest GDP per capita at USD 84,518 in 2013.

Therefore, I would expect the damage function should relate to latitude, starting temperature, change in temperature, land area at the latitude and possibly distribution of GDP per capita at that latitude.

Current global GDP per capita is roughly $ 9,000 per person and the global population is about 7 billion.

Furthermore, it's easy to see from this equation that as population rises through the coming decades, as expected, either the combination of the GDP per Capita or Carbon Intensity of the Economy terms must fall nearly to zero, in order to drive deep reductions in the Carbon Emissions side of the equation.

Growth in GDP per capita also put upward pressure on CO2 emissions, adding about 7 MMmt compared with the 2005 — 15 trend.

with its highly optimistic assumptions about the future availability of renewables, nuclear, and CCS, the mid-century carbon emission reduction goal could only be achieved if the annual growth in GDP per capita between now and 2050 were to slow to a rate of 1 % per year.

[73] As a measure of general economic wellbeing, America's GDP per capita was $ 54,629 in 2014.

These were compared to past global temperatures, the Palmer Drought Index, and data for the 10 East African countries represented in the study on population size, population growth, GDP per capita, rate of change of GDP per capita, life expectancy and political stability.

These indicators should include those on adequacy (e.g. carbon budgets used, mitigation pathways followed), responsibility (e.g. start date from which responsibility is calculated, which gases are included, etc.), capability (e.g. GDP, GDP per capita, poverty, etc.), the sustainable development need, and adaptation need..

-- Muller believes humans are changing climate with CO2 emissions — humans have been responsible for «most» of a 0.4 C warming since 1957, almost none of the warming before then — IPCC is in trouble due to sloppy science, exaggerated predictions; chairman will have to resign — the «Climategate» mails were not «hacked» — they were «leaked» by an insider — due to «hide the decline» deception, Muller will not read any future papers by Michael Mann — there has been no increase in hurricanes or tornadoes due to global warming — automobiles are insignificant in overall picture — China is the major CO2 producer, considerably more than USA today — # 1 priority for China is growth of economy — global warming is not considered important — China CO2 efficiency (GDP per ton CO2) is around one - fourth of USA today, has much room for improvement — China growth will make per capita CO2 emissions at same level as USA today by year 2040 — if it is «not profitable» it is «not sustainable» — US energy future depends on shale gas for automobiles; hydrogen will not be a factor — nor will electric cars, due to high cost — Muller is upbeat on nuclear (this was recorded pre-Fukushima)-- there has been no warming in the USA — Muller was not convinced of Hansen's GISS temperature record; hopes BEST will provide a better record.

For example, the INDC explicitly recognizes that GDP per capita, along with greenhouse gas emissions per capita, are important considerations in determining whether a contribution is fair.