Amid the relentless grip of the COVID-19 pandemic, sustainability has emerged as a paramount concern across global economies. As businesses grapple with unprecedented challenges, the imperative for sustainable practices in corporate finance becomes increasingly evident. Throughout this crisis, companies have faced staggering financial strains, with diminished turnovers and escalating operational costs pushing many to the brink of collapse. In response, governments worldwide have provided vital support, albeit often insufficient, underscoring the necessity for sustainable mechanisms of intervention. Central to this discourse is an examination of how companies have adapted their financing policies amidst the pandemic’s tumult. Government-backed credit facilities have served as a critical lifeline for numerous businesses, emphasizing the need for sustainable financial instruments readily deployable in times of crisis. Concurrently, moratoriums on existing credit obligations have offered temporary relief, albeit with looming concerns regarding heightened corporate indebtedness. Moreover, the pandemic’s aftermath has witnessed a pronounced uptick in corporate borrowing, compounded by surging interest rates. This confluence underscores the exigency for companies to adopt sustainable financial strategies, mindful not only of short-term exigencies but also the enduring ramifications on financial stability. In navigating these challenges, a holistic approach to sustainability is imperative. Governments must ensure robust support mechanisms, while companies must proactively seek sustainable financing solutions. Concurrently, stakeholders must meticulously weigh the long-term repercussions of financial policy adjustments, thereby fortifying corporate resilience against future crises while safeguarding the stability of the global economy. In essence, the COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the critical imperative for sustainability in corporate finance. By heeding this call and embracing sustainable practices, businesses can navigate crises with greater resilience, ensuring not only their survival but also the enduring stability of the economic landscape.

Despite its leading role in the urban transport system, paratransit is accused of being unsustainable and hostile to modernity. The reform of the sector is necessary in the context of the modernization of the transport system of African cities. It requires the formalization of actors through technical and financial support such as fleet renewal projects. This article attempts to analyze the financing process and the level of formalism of the operators constituted within the AFTU in the context of the financing operation of paratransit operators in Dakar, Senegal. The methodological approach adopted is based on the analysis of qualitative data from questionnaire surveys carried out in the AFTU network in Dakar; official documents¹ were also used. The results show that the Dakar financing model put in place has made it possible to make significant progress in the reorganization of paratransit professionals. In addition to the concessioned lines, a salaried system was introduced, pricing is now official and the standardized ticketing system has been put in place. Nevertheless, improvements are expected on the working conditions of employees, the capacity building of actors and the evolution of the legal status of companies.

This research analyzes disaster risk financing within the framework of the disaster management policy in Indonesia as the implementation of the Disaster Management Law, Number 24 of 2007, by examining recent issues, challenges, and opportunities in disaster financing. Utilizing a qualitative approach, the research systematically reviews various studies, reports, and existing regulations and policies to understand the current landscape comprehensively. Recent developments in disaster risk financing in Indonesia highlight the need for a nuanced exploration of the existing policy framework. Fiscal constraints, evolving risk landscapes, and the increasing frequency of disasters underscore the urgency of effective disaster risk financing strategies. Through a qualitative examination, this study identifies challenges while illuminating opportunities for innovation and improvement within the current policy framework. The contribution of this research extends to both theoretical and practical levels. Theoretically, it enriches the academic discourse on disaster risk financing by offering a nuanced understanding of the complexities involved. On a practical level, the findings derived from the examination provide actionable recommendations for policymakers and practitioners engaged in disaster management in Indonesia. The insights aim to inform the refinement of disaster management policies and practices, fostering resilience and adaptability in the face of evolving disaster scenarios.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) hopes to deliver trillions of dollars in infrastructure financing to Asia, Europe, and Africa. If the initiative follows Chinese practices to date for infrastructure financing, which often entail lending to sovereign borrowers, then BRI raises the risk of debt distress in some borrower countries. This paper assesses the likelihood of debt problems in the 68 countries identified as potential BRI borrowers. We conclude that eight countries are at particular risk of debt distress based on an identified pipeline of project lending associated with BRI.

Because this indebtedness also suggests a higher concentration in debt owed to official and quasi-official Chinese creditors, we examine Chinese policies and practices related to sustainable financing and the management of debt problems in borrower countries. Based on this evidence, we offer recommendations to improve Chinese policy in these areas. The recommendations are offered to Chinese policymakers directly, as well as to BRI’s bilateral and multilateral partners, including the IMF and World Bank. 

We investigate the impact on intertemporal distribution caused by a change of policy from tax to deficit financing of public investment, using a simple theoretical framework which combines the one-period McGuire-Olson economy with the conventional long-run Solow economy. This theoretical framework provides a simple way to highlight some significant interdependencies between private and public investments as well as the negative impact of taxation on aggregate productivity, and to trace some possible transmission mechanisms between deficit financing policies and the long-run path of consumption per head. The main tentative (theoretical) result is that although under fairly acceptable assumptions the likely impact of a deficit financing policy is to benefit the present at the expense of the future, under equally acceptable assumptions concerning the possibility of an excessive macro private saving–investment propensity, and/or of a significant productivity loss due to the excess burden of taxation, the adverse intertemporal distributional impact of deficit financing might become negligible, or even disappear altogether.