面对课程体系与国际工程实践脱节的挑战，联合教学团队以能力矩阵为主线，打破传统按学科板块 分割设置课程的做法，将工程技术、工程经济、工程法律和工程管理等知识，与全球规则、跨文化沟 通、领导力等核心要素有机融合，构建"基础夯实—专业深化—实战提升"三阶贯通课程体系。 在基础阶段，开设《工程伦理学》《工程管理专业名著导读》《"一带一路"战略与国际关系》等课 程，将国际形势、人类命运共同体理念、工程伦理与家国情怀融入专业启蒙；专业阶段则聚焦《国际工 程承包》《工程造价管理国际惯例》《国际工程项目投融资》《国际工程合同条件》《国际工程法律》 《国际金融》《国际贸易》（双语）等课程，引入招投标、合同管理、金融贸易、风险管理与争端解决 等内容，通过典型案例、区域情境分析和双语教学实现与国际工程实践的深度衔接；实战阶段则将国际 工程情境系统融入专业设计、毕业设计、集中实习和个性化模块，围绕真实或拟真项目开展方案比选、 风险研判、商务谈判、团队协同等训练，打通"知识链""能力链""价值链"。 央视网消息：在全球经济一体化纵深推进与"一带一路"倡议全面实施的背景下，中国建造正处在 从"走出去"迈向"强起来"的关键阶段。习近平总书 ...

Group 1 - The European Central Bank (ECB) has cut interest rates eight times this year, bringing the rate down to 2%, while the U.S. Federal Reserve has not initiated rate cuts, indicating a complex economic landscape [1][3] - The inflation rate in the Eurozone has fallen below the ECB's target of 2%, providing ample room for further rate cuts, contrasting with the persistent inflation issues faced by the U.S. due to excessive liquidity from previous quantitative easing [3][8] - The interconnectedness of the U.S. and European economies is significant, with a correlation of 70%-80%, meaning U.S. economic fluctuations directly impact European markets [3][8] Group 2 - The U.S. consumer market accounts for 20%-30% of global consumption, and trends in U.S. consumer behavior often lead global demand changes, exemplified by the influence of companies like Tesla and Apple on their respective industries [3][7] - The Federal Reserve's monetary policy has a strong spillover effect globally, with a 1% increase in U.S. interest rates potentially reducing GDP by 0.5% in developed economies and 0.8% in emerging markets over three years [3][8] Group 3 - The ongoing impact of the Federal Reserve's quantitative easing since the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly benefited global economies, including China, which reported a trade surplus of $980 billion in 2023 [7] - The global economy is highly integrated, and any downturn in the U.S. economy is likely to affect other economies through trade, investment, and financial channels, as historical data suggests that over 90% of economies struggle during U.S. recessions [8][10] Group 4 - Recent data indicates a slight slowdown in the U.S. labor market, with non-farm payrolls increasing by 150,000 in August, below market expectations, and a small rise in the unemployment rate to 3.9% [10][13] - A decline in U.S. consumer spending by 1% could lead to a 0.5% reduction in global trade volume, highlighting the interconnectedness of the global economy [10][13] Group 5 - The current global economic situation is precarious, with the ECB's rate cuts reflecting reduced inflation pressures, yet the U.S. economy remains central to the global economic framework [13] - Investors should closely monitor U.S. employment, consumer confidence, and inflation data, as these indicators will influence the Federal Reserve's monetary policy and global market risk appetite [13]

然而，机遇总是伴随着挑战，新兴市场的政治不稳定、经济波动和监管环境的不确定性也为投资者带来了不小的风 险。首先，从全球经济趋势来看，新兴市场正逐渐成为全球经济增长的主要驱动力。随着发达国家经济增长放缓， 新兴市场以其较低的起点和巨大的发展潜力，成为国际资本的新宠。这些市场不仅提供了丰富的自然资源，还拥有 不断壮大的中产阶级，为国际投资提供了巨大的消费市场和投资回报。然而，投资新兴市场并非没有风险。政治风 险是国际投资者必须面对的首要问题。新兴市场的政治环境往往较为复杂，政权更迭、政策变动都可能对投资项目 产生重大影响。此外，经济波动也是不容忽视的风险因素。新兴市场国家的经济往往较为脆弱，容易受到国际市场 波动的影响，如汇率波动、原材料价格变动等都可能对投资回报造成影响。为了把握投资先机，投资者需要深入分 析新兴市场的具体国情，包括政治稳定性、经济基本面、市场潜力等。同时，投资者还应关注全球经济趋势，如贸 易政策、货币政策等，这些都可能对新兴市场的投资环境产生影响。通过多元化投资策略，如分散投资、长期投资 等，可以有效降低单一市场的风险。在应对潜在风险方面，投资者需要建立风险管理体系，包括风险评估、风险监 控和 ...

美国长期以来奉行"美国优先"的极端利己主义政策，将关税作为打压竞争对手、维护自身产业优势的工具。在对华贸易问题 上，美国无端指责中国"不公平贸易行为"，肆意发动贸易战。但这不仅导致美国相关企业面临成本上升的压力，也使得美国下 游企业因零部件价格上涨而遭受损失，同时还影响了全球半导体产业的正常发展。美国这种以邻为壑的做法，暴露了其霸权逻 辑下的短视和自私，其目的无非是想通过贸易保护主义手段来迟滞中国等新兴经济体的发展步伐，维持自身在全球经济中的主 导地位。 近期，特朗普政府相继胁迫数十个国家对华加征高额关税，一开始是欧盟，后来是北约成员国，再后来是G7国家。美方给出的 理由是，中国跟印度一直都在购买俄罗斯的石油，这削弱了对俄罗斯的制裁效果，于是俄罗斯总统普京才不肯结束俄乌冲突。 因此，美国总统特朗普要求盟国必须共同对中国加征关税。但令人没有想到的是，日本此次一个站出来反对美国胁迫盟国对华 加征关税。 据日本媒体9月16日报道称，日本财务大臣加藤胜信当天明确表示，仅仅因为某一国从俄罗斯进口石油就将关税提高到50%，甚 至100%的水平，对我们而言是难以做到的。此番表态等是直接拒绝了听从特朗普的指令，对华加征关税。 ...

新华财经内罗毕8月9日电肯尼亚主流媒体《星报》8日刊发肯尼亚国际关系学者阿德希尔·卡文斯题为 《非洲如何应对特朗普的惩罚性关税》的文章说，美国政府全面加征关税政策近日生效，此类保护主义 政策将导致贸易规模缩减、经济增长放缓、居民消费价格上涨及地缘政治风险上升。美国重启贸易战并 与主要贸易伙伴形成对抗态势，恐将破坏数十年来形成的全球经济一体化格局。文章摘要如下： 美国关税壁垒推高进口商品成本，迫使全球产业链供应链加速重组。美国的惩罚性征税措施，可能阻断 大宗商品、电子产品及纺织品等关键领域贸易通道。 非洲大陆高度依赖出口贸易、外国投资及多边贸易体系，惩罚性关税将加剧其经济脆弱性。在非洲应对 债务危机、气候灾害及新冠疫情后复苏等多重挑战之际，贸易战进一步挤压其发展空间。相较于其他具 备财政缓冲能力的大型经济体，非洲国家缺乏抵御贸易冲击的政策工具。 以肯尼亚为例，特朗普政府对肯输美商品加征关税暂缓期已结束，肯尼亚面临严峻关税冲击，预计将面 临60万个就业岗位流失及逾130亿肯尼亚先令（1美元约合129肯尼亚先令）财政收入损失。 当前，《非洲大陆自由贸易协定》虽稳步推进，但区域内贸易仅占非洲贸易总量的18%，难以抵消 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the impact of the U.S. government's imposition of punitive tariffs, highlighting the potential negative effects on global trade, economic growth, and geopolitical stability, particularly for African economies [1]. Group 1: Economic Impact - The U.S. tariff barriers are expected to increase the cost of imported goods, leading to a restructuring of global supply chains [1]. - The punitive tariffs may disrupt trade channels in key sectors such as commodities, electronics, and textiles [1]. - African economies, which heavily rely on export trade, foreign investment, and multilateral trade systems, will face increased economic vulnerability due to these tariffs [1]. Group 2: Specific Case of Kenya - Kenya is projected to experience significant adverse effects from the U.S. tariffs, with an estimated loss of 600,000 jobs and over 13 billion Kenyan shillings in fiscal revenue [1]. - The end of the grace period for tariffs on Kenyan goods entering the U.S. poses a severe challenge for the country [1]. Group 3: Regional Trade Dynamics - Despite the ongoing progress of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement, intra-African trade accounts for only 18% of total African trade, which is insufficient to mitigate the impacts of global trade disruptions [2]. - The article emphasizes the need for African nations to diversify their trade strategies, reduce dependency on the U.S. market, and strengthen regional trade under the African Continental Free Trade Area framework [2].

Core Viewpoint - A proposal from some U.S. lawmakers aims to revoke China's Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) status, which has been in place since China's accession to the WTO in 2001, potentially destabilizing U.S.-China trade relations and impacting the global economy more severely than tariffs imposed during the Trump administration [1][3]. Group 1: Economic Implications - The revocation of MFN status would lead to higher tariffs on Chinese goods, which could increase costs for American consumers who rely heavily on Chinese products, including electronics and household items [3][4]. - The U.S. aims to reduce dependence on Chinese goods and restore its manufacturing sector, but this approach may be overly idealistic given the hollowing out of U.S. manufacturing and the outflow of technology and capital [3][4]. - The proposal could result in a short-term weakening of the Chinese economy, but the long-term consequences would likely be detrimental to U.S. consumers, who would face higher prices [3][4]. Group 2: Global Trade Dynamics - The U.S. lawmakers' proposal underestimates China's ability to respond to challenges, as China's economic structure has evolved beyond low-cost manufacturing, making its position in the global supply chain nearly unassailable [4][5]. - The attempt to isolate China through such policies contradicts the trend of globalization, and could lead to greater difficulties for the U.S. if trade conflicts arise [4][5]. - Revoking MFN status undermines the principles of fair trade established by the WTO and could destabilize the international trade system, which has been built on the foundation of mutual economic cooperation [5][7]. Group 3: Political Motivations - The proposal reflects deeper political motivations to curb China's rise and restore U.S. manufacturing, but it fails to recognize the interdependence of U.S.-China economic relations [3][7]. - The U.S. has historically advocated for free trade, and reversing this stance could lead to global criticism and opposition from other economic entities [4][5].

Group 1 - The trend of global economic fragmentation is becoming increasingly significant, driven by trade and technological decoupling, policy divergence, and rising global uncertainty [1][2] - Fragmentation is a relative concept compared to globalization and integration, characterized by weakened economic ties between countries, increased trade barriers, intentional technological decoupling, and restrictions on factor mobility [2][3] - The past 15 years have shown a continuous process of fragmentation, with recent trends indicating a clear decoupling in global trade structures, particularly highlighted by the Russia-Europe divide following the Ukraine conflict [2][3] Group 2 - The rise of populism and extremism has significantly impacted global fragmentation, with many countries believing that privatization, free markets, and trade liberalization are optimal solutions, while the era of super globalization is considered over [3] - The trade conflict between the US and China is a key driver accelerating global fragmentation, with ongoing complaints from the US regarding trade barriers, intellectual property protection, and market access issues [3] - Geopolitical factors have led to fragmentation between the US and China, with a shift in focus from economic efficiency to economic security, which may have substantial implications for future development [3] Group 3 - There is a need to establish a strong awareness of a shared human destiny and confidence in the inevitability of global economic integration and cooperation in industrial division [4] - Recommendations include encouraging technological innovation and cooperation, maintaining overall financial market stability, promoting educational reform, and enhancing policy coordination and communication [4] - A dual approach is suggested to advance globalization while addressing the challenges posed by fragmentation [4]

Group 1 - The concept of fragmentation is defined as the phenomenon where global trade, investment, and technology exchanges become increasingly divided into relatively independent economic groups and regions due to cognitive biases, geopolitical factors, populism, and trade protectionism [2] - Trade protectionism and populism stem from cognitive biases, such as the belief that trade surpluses are exploitative and that tariffs primarily burden exporting countries rather than importing ones [2] - The recent agreement between the US and China to suspend most mutual tariffs highlights the importance of cooperation in the face of fragmentation [2] Group 2 - Constructive global cooperation is essential in addressing common challenges such as economic recession, climate change, and technological transformation [3] - There is a need to correct cognitive biases and emphasize the importance of economic trade balance and the relationship between trade deficits and the status of sovereign currencies as world currencies [3] - Encouraging technological innovation and cooperation, strengthening international capital ties, and improving policy coordination and transparency are crucial steps to counter fragmentation [3] Group 3 - The approach to dealing with conflicts should involve a firm commitment to beliefs, principles, and actions, emphasizing that globalization is an unstoppable trend [4] - The notion of "everyone's well-being is the true well-being" should guide efforts to address the issues of fragmentation [4]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint is that global economic integration is currently stagnating and even regressing, with changes occurring at an accelerated pace in recent weeks [1]