DOCSLIB.ORG

EUROPE 2030 the Roadmap for a Liberal Europe and How to Get There

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EUROPE 2030 the Roadmap for a Liberal Europe and How to Get There LIBERAL WHITE BOOK EUROPE 2030 The Roadmap for a liberal Europe and how to get there Edited by ANTONIOS FRANCESCO MARIA VINCENT CARMEN NESTORAS CAPPELLETTI ALESINA DELHOMME DESCAMPS p. 5 # Introduction INDEX p. 9 # Sustainability and 1 Climate Change p. 40 # Democracy and 2 Rule of Law p. 70 # Internal Market 3 and Trade p. 90 # Digitalisation,Connectivity, 4 and e-Commerce p. 124 # Internal Market 5 and Trade What will Europe be like in 2030? No one has the answer yet, but everyone should take part in the crucial FOREWARD discussion. The choices we make today will define how the EU looks like ten years down the road: muddling through or changing fundamentally so as to build a better Europe. The EU has always managed to rise up to new challenges when needed and to take decisive steps when facing existential crises. What we need now is a new vision and a concrete roadmap for action, and even more so in the midst of a global pandemic, which has put into question many of the things that we had been taking for granted. The Liberal White Book 2030 is the contribution from the liberal family to this debate. The pieces brough together in the present book are the offspring of the intense discussions that took place in a series of online events organised by the European Liberal Forum throughout the year 2020. These events gathered some of the finest minds of today’s European intellectual landscape as well as a wide range of relevant stakeholders. All the key topics were addressed, from climate change to the economic and monetary Union, from democracy and the rule of law to the much-needed digitalisation of our continent. The ideas that came out of these discussions and that are laid down in the various chapters of this book are thus both firmly grounded theoretically and well-fit for the real world. This publication highlights the challenges, which the EU faces, and puts forwards a number of bold policy proposals. We hope that it becomes a point of reference for liberal policymakers and all those who want to shape Europe’s future. ...COMING SOON While we can all agree that the EU requires reforming, we may not all agree on what these reforms should be. The Liberal White Book 2030 does not shy away from potential disagreements. It defends a liberal way for the EU, a way where economic freedom, civil liberties, and democracy remain our lodestars. This means strengthening the (digital) single market and the economic, monetary, and budgetary Union. This also means providing the EU with an increased capacity to speak with one voice on the world stage, so that these values are defended and our Union remains a model that is envied and looked up to, a beacon of hope for the peoples of this planet. A liberal Europe is one that believes in its citizens’ abilities and that every level of government has a role to play. Bigger is not necessarily better. A more effective EU does not always mean more of the EU. Whenever Member States, regions, local governments, businesses, and individuals can solve their problems by themselves, there is a good reason to let them do so. The EU already has a lot on its plate. A liberal Europe is the one where Member States are allowed to advance at their own pace and where those seeking further integration are not prevented from doing so. Our diversity is our most precious treasure. We liberals can be proud of our values that have brought peace, prosperity, and progress on our continent, but we must not be complacent. Euroscepticism and populism strive on people’s feeling of uprootedness, neglect, and lack of opportunities. Our citizens must be listened to and their fears and doubts not be dismissed. The best way we can respond to citizens’ hopes and concerns is by building a freer and better European society where everyone finds his or her own place and contribution. INTRODUCTION The 2020 was a momentous year for Europe and its future. It has left us with a sense of despair but also INTRODUCTION plenty of reasons to hope. It is the year that has seen for the first time a Member State leave the European Union, after long and painful rounds of negotiations. The worst pandemic in a century hit our continent badly, leaving our communities wounded and our economies in tatters. But 2020 also saw the adoption of an unprecedented recovery plan in Europe and the election of a new US President that opens an era of cautious optimism for the world. In 2016, Brexit sent shockwaves through the EU and raised the prospect of various Frexit, Nexit or Polexit, but five years later, no such thing has happened. Europe remains divided on many issues, but it has sent a clear message of unity and decisiveness. It has defended the integrity of its common home and managed to stay firm on its core principles. Brexit also proved to be a timely reminder of the benefits of EU membership and of what it means, in practice, to give them up. Leaving did not only translate in longer queues of lorries at the border between Dover and Calais but has also greatly diminished the ability of EU citizens to live and settle in the UK, a place where so many had made their homes in the last decades. Brexit has also sparked new tensions in Northern Ireland, illustrating there, too, the importance of open borders on a continent of multiple identities. These provide only a glimpse of what would happen if the entire edifice collapsed and should convince us to work as hard as we can so that this never comes true. In early 2021, a day before Brexit became official, the World Health Organisation declared the Covid-19 outbreak to be a public health emergency of international concern. This was the prelude to a pandemic wave that would take over our continent and soon the entire world, a wave that no one had anticipated. Most European capitals responded with painful lockdowns and restrictions of personal freedoms. Unfortunately, these measures have spanned well into 2021. The EU found itself under the spotlight, accused of not having done enough to help Member States coordinate their response. Internal borders were shut, and States resorted to once forgotten protectionist measures, seizing each other’s shipment of facemasks or other medical devices. Criticism of the EU was mostly disingenuous, as it had willingly been kept at a distance from national healthcare systems, but it revealed nonetheless that the EU needed to do better. In many ways it did. It provided Member States with equipment and medical guidance, laying the first bricks of a European Health Union that is better prepared for future public health emergencies. Regarding vaccines, the picture is more nuanced. Although the EU took up a leading role in a massive effort of vaccine procurement, the European Commission failed to deliver a sufficient supply. Now that vaccination is well underway, one can appreciate the pertinence of a joint approach that has ensured that no Member State is left behind. But responsibility should have and will have to be assumed for the problems that have occurred. A more mature EU is also one where its top executive can be criticised, even by the most fervent supporters of the project. Faced with the disastrous economic consequences of the pandemic, Member States have agreed to a historical recovery plan. With the NextGenerationEU instrument, made of €750 million of loans and LIBERALFORUM.EU 5 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION grants, Member States will be able to overcome the current difficulties. But NextGenerationEU is more From July to November, the European Liberal Forum hosted a series of expert discussions dedicated to the than a recovery plan, it is a unique chance for Europe to emerge stronger from the pandemic and to build most pressing issues facing a freer, fairer, and more liberal Europe. These discussions brought together a sustainable, more digital, and more resilient future. This money will have to be spent on activities and various stakeholders: from European and national politics, public institutions, academia, policy-making innovations of tomorrow, not of yesterday. It must not be a substitute for structural reforms but an incentive circles, and civil society. They also greatly benefitted from the insights of our member organisations, who to accelerate them. live and experience Europe on the ground, in close contact with its citizens. The centrepiece of the NextGeneration instrument is the EU Recovery and Resilience Facility, which will These open and honest discussions were truly invigorating. Organised around eight clusters – future make 627,5 billion EUR in loans and grants available to Member States to support reforms and investments institutional framework; climate change and sustainability; democracy and rule of law; internal market and for a sustainable recovery. The path to recovery, the approved reforms, and the means of repayment trade; digitalisation, connectivity and e-commerce; security policy and foreign affairs; social policy; budget of the ‘largest stimulus package ever’ will likely have long-term and far-reaching consequences on the and Economic and Monetary Union – they brought some fresh ideas and solutions and provided us with direction and degree of fiscal integration in the EU. a roadmap to a renewed Europe, faithful to its founding liberal principles and better armed to meet its citizens’ current expectations. In November 2020, after days of nerve-racking uncertainty, the major American news outlets announced the election of Joe Biden as the 46th President of the United States, putting an end to Donald Trump’s For each of the key issues identified, specific chapters were drawn up and gathered in the present Liberal term in office.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2017 Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT 2017 REPORT ANNUAL ANNUAL Bruegel is a European think tank specialising in economics. Established in 2005, Bruegel is REPORT independent and non-doctrinal. Its mission is to improve the quality of economic policy with open and evidence-based research, analysis and debate. Bruegel is registered as a Belgian international non- profit association (Association Internationale Sans But Lucratif) under the number 0867636096, with registered offices at rue de la Charité 33, B-1210 Brussels. The basis for its governance is found in its statute and bylaws. Rue de la Charité 33 2017 1210 Brussels, Belgium Tel: +32 2 227 4210 Fax: +32 2 227 4219 www.bruegel.org @bruegel_org BRUEGEL ANNUAL REPORT 2017 © Bruegel 2018. All rights reserved. This publication is published under the editorial responsibility of Guntram Wolff, director of Bruegel. Editorial coordination: Giuseppe Porcaro. Editorial team: Alessandro Borsello, Sean Gibson. Graphic concept and design: Alessandro Borsello. CONTENTS Foreword from the Chairman 5 Foreword from the Director 7 1. ANATOMY 9 Anatomy of a think tank 10 A window on transparency 11 Brueegel's commitment to gender balance 13 A network of talents 14 Staff list 27 2. IMPACT 29 Editorial outreach & rankings 31 Events 34 Podcasts 35 Testimonies 37 3. RESEARCH 39 Bruegel's research programme 40 European macroeconomics and governance 42 Finance and financial regulation 51 Global economics and governance 57 Competition policy and innovation policy 66 Energy and climate 71 4. GOVERNANCE 76 Our governance 78 Governance model 79 The Board 80 Scientific Council 81 Our members 82 Management team 84 Bruegel’s funding 85 Financial statements 86 3 WE WILL CONTINUE TO ENGAGE IN ALL THESE DISCUSSIONS, BRINGING EVIDENCE-BASED ANALYSIS THAT INFORMS AND EXPLAINS WITH THE AIM OF PROMOTING OUTCOMES THAT ARE SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE.
    [Show full text]
  • Guntram Wolff
    Guntram Wolff Director of Bruegel Guntram Wolff has been the Director of Bruegel since June 2013. His research focuses on the European economy and governance, on fiscal and monetary policy and global finance. He regularly testifies at the European Finance Ministers' ECOFIN meeting, the European Parliament, the German Parliament (Bundestag) and the French Parliament (Assemblée Nationale) and is a member of the French prime minister's Conseil d'Analyse Economique. Guntram Wolff is also a member of the Solvay Brussels School's international advisory board of the Brussels Free University. He joined Bruegel from the European Commission, where he worked on the macroeconomics of the euro area and the reform of euro area governance. Prior to joining the Commission, he was coordinating the research team on fiscal policy at Deutsche Bundesbank. He also worked as an adviser to the International Monetary Fund. He holds a PhD from the University of Bonn, studied economics in Bonn, Toulouse, Pittsburgh and Passau and previously taught economics at the University of Pittsburgh and at Université libre de Bruxelles. He has published numerous papers in leading academic journals. Guntram is fluent in German, English, French and has good notions of Bulgarian and Spanish. His columns and policy work are published and cited in leading international media such as the Financial Times, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Caixin, Nikkei, El Pais, La Stampa, FAZ, Handelsblatt, Les Echos, BBC, ZDF, and others. Page 1/2 Guntram Wolff Director of Bruegel Bibliographie Yves Bertoncini , Piero Gastaldo , Aart De Geus , Mikko Kosonen , Robin Niblett , Artur Santos Silva , Guntram Wolff , "The refugee crisis: A European call for action", Other document, Paris, Institut Jacques Delors, 18/03/2016 Pia Hüttl , Guntram Wolff , "The growing intergenerational divide in Europe - What role for the welfare state?", Policy paper, Paris, Institut Jacques Delors, 09/02/2016 Page 2/2.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a More Resilient Euro Area
    TOWARDS A MORE RESILIENT EURO AREA IDEAS FROM THE ‘FUTURE EUROPE’ FORUM EDITED BY JOCHEN ANDRITZKY AND JÖRG ROCHOLL TOWARDS A MORE RESILIENT EURO AREA IDEAS FROM THE ‘FUTURE EUROPE’ FORUM EDITED BY JOCHEN ANDRITZKY AND JÖRG ROCHOLL CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN POLICY STUDIES (CEPS) BRUSSELS ESMT BERLIN GERMAN COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC EXPERTS (GCEE) WIESBADEN The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound policy research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe. ESMT Berlin is an international business school and provides an interdisciplinary platform for discourse between politics, business, and academia. The German Council of Economic Experts (GCEE) is an academic body advising German policy makers on questions of economic policy. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) of the essays and comments and should not be attributed to CEPS, ESMT or the GCEE. Details of the authors and ‘Future Europe’ forum participants contributing to this collection can be found in the final chapter. The editors would like to thank in particular Martha Ihlbrock from ESMT for her diligent support in facilitating the forum. Cover illustration Shutterstock/Leifstiller. ISBN 978-94-6138-690-8 © Copyright 2018, CEPS, ESMT and GCEE All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior permission of the CEPS, ESMT and GCEE. Centre for European Policy Studies Place du Congrès 1, B-1000 Brussels Tel: (32.2) 229.39.11 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.ceps.eu Contents Forewords .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Economy of Germany in the Sovereign Debt Crisis 143 Daniela Schwarzer
    PETERSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS BRUEGEL SPECIAL REPORT 21 Resolving the European Debt Crisis William R. Cline and Guntram B. Wolff, editors February 2012 Resolving the European Debt Crisis William R. Cline and Guntram B. Wolff, editors PETERSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS BRUEGEL Washington, DC February 2012 00--FM--i-x.indd 1 2/24/12 3:20 PM William R. Cline has been a senior fellow Typesetting by BMWW at the Peterson Institute for International Printing by Versa Press, Inc. Economics since its inception in 1981. While on leave during 1996–2001, he was deputy BRUEGEL managing director and chief economist of 33 Rue de la Charité/Liefdadigheidsstraat 33 the Institute of International Finance. Since B-1210 Brussels, Belgium 2002 he has held a joint appointment with the Phone: +32 2 227 4210 Center for Global Development. He has been Fax: +32 2 227 4219 a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution www.bruegel.org (1973–81); deputy director for development and trade research, US Treasury Department Jean Pisani-Ferry, Director (1971–73); Ford Foundation visiting professor in Brazil (1970–71); and lecturer and Copyright © 2012 by the Peter G. Peterson assistant professor of economics at Princeton Institute for International Economics. All University (1967–70). He graduated summa rights reserved. No part of this book may cum laude from Princeton University in 1963 be reproduced or utilized in any form or and received his PhD in economics from by any means, electronic or mechanical, Yale University in 1969. He is the author of including photocopying, recording, or by 24 books, including Financial Globalization, information storage or retrieval system, Economic Growth, and the Crisis of 2007–09 without permission from the Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • The G-20 and Central Banks in the New World of Unconventional Monetary Policy
    Think Tank 20: The G-20 and Central Banks in the New World of Unconventional Monetary Policy Izak Atiyas Haroon Bhorat Kemal Derviş Peter Drysdale Claudio R. Frischtak Ippei Fujiwara Daniel Gros Paolo Guerrieri Alan Hirsch E. Fuat Keyman Homi Kharas Miguel Kiguel Donald Kohn Xue Lan Marina Larionova Wonhyuk Lim Jacques Mistral Rakesh Mohan Yoshio Okubo Guillermo Ortiz Galip Kemal Ozhan Andrey Shelepov Paola Subacchi Maria Monica Wihardja Guntram B. Wolff Qiao Yu August 2013 Think Tank 20: The G-20 and Central Banks in the New World of Unconventional Monetary Policy Izak Atiyas Haroon Bhorat Kemal Derviş Peter Drysdale Claudio R. Frischtak Ippei Fujiwara Daniel Gros Paolo Guerrieri Alan Hirsch E. Fuat Keyman Homi Kharas Miguel Kiguel Donald Kohn Xue Lan Marina Larionova Wonhyuk Lim Jacques Mistral Rakesh Mohan Yoshio Okubo Guillermo Ortiz Galip Kemal Ozhan Andrey Shelepov Paola Subacchi Maria Monica Wihardja Guntram B. Wolff Qiao Yu August 2013 CONTENTS Introduction: The G-20 and Central Banks in the New World of Unconventional Monetary Policy . 1 Kemal Derviş Vice President, Global Economy and Development, The Brookings Institution; Former Executive Head of the United Nations Development Program; Former Secretary of Treasury and Economy Minister, The Republic of Turkey; Advisor, Istanbul Policy Center Homi Kharas Senior Fellow and Deputy Director, Global Economy and Development, The Brookings Institution; Former Chief Economist, East Asia, The World Bank ARGENTINA Argentina’s Debt: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly . 6 Miguel Kiguel Former Under Secretary of Finance and Chief Advisor to the Minister of the Economy, Argentina; Former President, Banco Hipotecario; Director, Econviews; Professor, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella AUSTRALIA How Should the World View Japan’s New Economic Policy Strategy? .
    [Show full text]
  • Living (Dangerously) Without a Fiscal Union 2015/03
    LIVING (DANGEROUSLY) WITHOUT A FISCAL UNION 2015/03 ASHOKA MODY Highlights • The euro area’s political contract requires member nations to rely principally on their own resources when confronted with severe eco- nomic distress. Since monetary policy is the same for all, national fiscal austerity is the default response to counter national fiscal stress. Moreover, the monetary policy was itself stodgy in counte- ring the crisis, and banking-sector problems were allowed to fester. And it was considered inappropriate to impose losses on private- sector creditors. Thus, the nature of the incomplete monetary union and the self-imposed taboos led deep and persistent fiscal austerity to become the norm. As a consequence, growth was hurt, which un- dermined the primary objective of lowering the debt burden. To pre- vent a meltdown, distressed nations were given official loans to repay private creditors. But the stress and instability continued and soon it became necessary to ease the repayment terms on official loans. When even that proved insufficient, the German-inspired fis- cal austerity was combined with the deep pockets of the European Central Bank. The ECB’s safety net for insolvent or near-insolvent BRUEGEL WORKING PAPER WORKING PAPER BRUEGEL banks and sovereigns, in effect, substituted for the absent fiscal union and drew the central bank into the political process. Ashoka Mody ([email protected]) is a Non-resident Fellow at Bruegel and Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor in International Economic Policy at the Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University. The author is grateful especially to Giulio Mazzolini for collaboration and extensive discussions, and to Kevin Cardiff, Ajai Chopra, Zsolt Darvas, Barry Eichengreen, Antonio Fatas, Peter Hall, Philip Lane, Karl Whelan and Guntram Wolff for generous and helpful comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Cuaderno De Documentacion
    SECRETARIA DE ESTADO DE ECONOMIA Y APOYO A LA EMPRESA MINISTERIO DE ECONOMÍA Y DIRECCION GENERAL DE POLÍTICA ECONOMICA COMPETITIVIDAD '$' UNIDAD DE APOYO CUADERNO DE DOCUMENTACION Número 102.2 ANEXO V Alvaro Espina 17 Septiembre de 2014 Entre el 12 de junio y el 1 de julio ft.com comment Columnists July 1, 2014 6:59 pm Bad advice from Basel’s Jeremiah By Martin Wolf The Bank for International Settlements’ proposals for post-crisis policy have serious flaws ©Ingram Pinn I admire the Bank for International Settlements. It takes courage to accuse its owners – the world’s main central banks – of incompetence. Yet this is what it has done, most recently in its latest annual report. It would be easy to dismiss this as the rantings of a prophet of doom. That would be a mistake. Whether or not one agrees with its pre- 1930s view of macroeconomic policy, the BIS raises big questions. Contrariness adds value. One can divide the BIS analysis into three parts: what caused the crisis; where we are now on the way out of it; and what we should do. More ON THIS STORY// Central banks urged to end loose policy/ BIS warns over ‘euphoric’ markets/ Business Blog Financial herd flees investment banking/ Bank of England Crashing the party/ Markets Insight Don’t bank on a comfortable rate ride ON THIS TOPIC// Forward guidance could ‘encourage risk’/ BIS warns over loose lending conditions/ On Monday Red flags wave over Asian corporate debt/ Trading in yen soars on ‘Abenomics’ drive MARTIN WOLF// No cause for complacency/ Defend Argentina from vultures/ Effects of climate fix/ UK has to be in or out of EU On the first, the perspective is that of the “financial cycle”.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report 22
    PETERSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS BRUEGEL SPECIAL REPORT 22 Transatlantic Economic Challenges in an Era of Growing Multipolarity Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, Nicolas Véron, and Guntram B. Wolff, editors July 2012 Special Report 22_Transatlantic Cover_Final.indd 1 6/25/2012 9:33:27 AM Transatlantic Economic Challenges in an Era of Growing Multipolarity Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, Nicolas Véron, and Guntram B. Wolff, editors PETERSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS BRUEGEL Washington, DC July 2012 Jacob Funk Kirkegaard has been a C. Fred Bergsten, Director research fellow at the Peterson Institute for Edward A. Tureen, Director of Publications, International Economics since 2002 and is Marketing, and Web Development also a senior associate at the Rhodium Group, a New York–based research firm. He is author Typesetting by BMWW of The Accelerating Decline in America’s High- Printing by Versa Press Skilled Workforce: Implications for Immigration Policy (2007) and coauthor of US Pension BRUEGEL Reform: Lessons from Other Countries (2009) and 33 Rue de la Charité/Liefdadigheidsstraat 33 Transforming the European Economy (2004). He B-1210 Brussels, Belgium is a graduate of the Danish Army’s Special Phone: +32 2 227 4210 School of Intelligence and Linguistics with Fax: +32 2 227 4219 the rank of first lieutenant; the University of www.bruegel.org Aarhus in Aarhus, Denmark; and Columbia University in New York. Jean Pisani-Ferry, Director Nicolas Véron is senior fellow at Bruegel Copyright © 2012 by the Peter G. Peterson and visiting fellow at the Peterson Institute Institute for International Economics and for International Economics. A graduate of Bruegel. All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Report “A Global Deal for Our Pandemic Age”
    A GLOBAL DEAL FOR OUR PANDEMIC AGE REPORT OF THE G20 HIGH LEVEL INDEPENDENT PANEL A GLOBAL DEAL FOR OUR PANDEMIC AGE Report of the G20 High Level Independent Panel on Financing the Global Commons for Pandemic Preparedness and Response June 2021 www.pandemic-financing.org A Global Deal for Our Pandemic Age: Foreword The High Level Independent Panel was asked by to ensure that large swathes of the world’s the G20 in January 2021 to propose how finance population are not left ill-equipped to respond can be organized, systematically and sustainably, to when a pandemic strikes, is in the mutual interests reduce the world’s vulnerability to future pandemics1. of all nations, not only a humanitarian imperative in its own right. Our report sets out critical and actionable solutions and investments to meet the challenge of an age of In short, we need a global deal for our pandemic pandemics, and to avoid a repeat of the catastrophic age. We must strengthen global governance and damage that COVID-19 has brought. The Panel mobilize greater and sustained investments in arrived at its recommendations after intensive global public goods, which have been dangerously deliberations and consultations with a wide range underfunded. Both are critical to building resilience of stakeholders and experts around the globe against future pandemics. over a period of four months. We urge that our proposals be discussed, developed further, and It requires establishing a global governance and implemented as a matter of urgency. financing mechanism, fitted to the scale and complexity of the challenge, besides bolstering Scaling up pandemic preparedness cannot wait the existing individual institutions, including the until COVID-19 is over.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emu and the Ebu: Time for Reform
    EDITORIAL THE EMU AND THE EBU: TIME FOR REFORM La UEM y la UBE: tiempo de reforma JEAN-VICTOR LOUIS1 Cómo citar/Citation Louis, J.-V. (2018). The EMU and the EBU: Time for reform. Revista de Derecho Comunitario Europeo, 59, 11-38. doi: https://doi.org/10.18042/cepc/rdce.59.01 “Europe is back” is the title of a publication of the official think tank of the EU Commission (EPSC, 2018). “EU27 on solid path of growth, job creation, investments, innovation and inclusion”, “Economy Growth has re- turned: the crisis is now firmly in the past”, “Investment has recovered”, “EU is world’s top destination for foreign investment”, “A global trading super- power”, “Euro is world’s second largest currency”: those and more are the titles of chapters of this EPSC paper full of optimism. Quoting SWIFT2, the document mentions that “over 36 % of global payments are concluded in 1 Catedrático emérito de la Universidad Libre de Bruselas. 2 Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, located in La Hulpe, near Brussels. 12 JEAN-VICTOR LOUIS euro — just short of the US dollar which stands at 39 %”3. And the list of comparative successes for the EU/Euro area continues in the same tone. Of course, the aim of the document is to describe the global situation of the EU/ Euro area, without considering the differences which still exist among the Member States. At this regard, one could mention the level of public debt, (European Commission, 2017:19)4 the still important number of jobless peo- ple or the working poor, especially among non-educated young people, or the subsistence of non-performing loans that still weakens the situation of some banks in determined countries, despite of the realised progresses in this field.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT ANNUAL REPORT 2016 REPORT ANNUAL Bruegel is a European think tank specialising 2016 in economics. Established in 2005, Bruegel is independent and non-doctrinal. Its mission is to improve the quality of economic policy with open and evidence-based research, analysis and debate. Bruegel is registered as a Belgian international non-profit association (Association Internationale Sans But Lucratif) under the number 0867636096, with registered offices at rue de la Charité 33, B-1210 Brussels. The basis for its governance is found in its statute and bylaws. Rue de la Charité 33 1210 Brussels, Belgium BRUEGEL ANNUAL REPORT 2016 © Bruegel 2017. All rights reserved. Tel: +32 2 227 4210 This publication is published under the editorial responsibility of Guntram Wolff, director of Bruegel. Fax: +32 2 227 4219 Editorial coordination: Giuseppe Porcaro. Editorial team: Stephen Gardner, Antonija Parat, Bryn Watkins. www.bruegel.org @bruegel_org Graphic concept and design: Alessandro Borsello. CONTENTS Foreword from the Chairman 5 Foreword from the Director 7 1. Bruegel at a glance 9 Tailor-made for impact 10 Transparency 12 Research team 14 Staff list 22 2. Policy impact 24 Editorial output 26 Events 28 Podcasts 30 Awards & rankings 31 Testimonies 32 3. Research in 2016 36 European macroeconomics and governance 39 Finance and financial regulation 50 Global economics and governance 56 Competition policy and innovation policy 61 Energy and climate 65 4. Governance & membership 70 Our governance 70 Governance model 71 The Board 72 Scientific Council 73 Our members 74 Bruegel’s triennial review 78 Management team 79 Bruegel’s funding 80 Financial statements 82 3 SEIZING THE OPPORTUNITY of moving ahead Renewal is sometimes forced upon us.
    [Show full text]
  • Making the Best of the European Single Market
    Policy Contribution Issue n˚3 | 2017 Making the best of the European single market Vincent Aussilloux, Agnès Bénassy-Quéré, Clemens Fuest and Guntram Wolff Executive summary The slow-down in productivity and income over the past decade has weakened the Euro- Vincent Aussilloux, pean Union’s output legitimacy, which is grounded in delivering prosperity to its citizens. At France Stratégie the same time, decreasing growth reduces the capacity of governments to maintain existing levels of welfare protection and translates into a perception of rising unfairness and inequality across and within EU countries. Agnès Bénassy-Quéré, It is estimated that remaining non-tariff obstacles, in particular in services sectors, limit École d’économie de Paris, intra-EU trade to a level about four times smaller than the intensity of trade between US Université de Paris 1, CAE states. By completing the single market, the EU could generate significant income gains. How- ever the more straightforward steps have already been taken, so the single market agenda now touches upon specific domestic regulations in EU countries. Clemens Fuest, Ifo We recommend a two-pillar strategy: for sectors with large externalities and/or economies Munich of scale (such as energy or telecoms), regulations should be harmonised and at least close coordination between regulators should be achieved; for other services sectors, the efficien- cy of individual regulations on a cost-benefit basis with respect to their objective should be Guntram Wolff, Bruegel, assessed, with systematic benchmarking. CAE We also recommend pursuing a credible environmental policy agenda on a destination basis (impacting both EU and non-EU firms) rather than on an origin basis (which is the case today), through a combination of ambitious technical standards, a reference path for the car- bon price and revenue-neutral tax instruments.
    [Show full text]