Search

Begin New Search Topic Crisis Management Political Geography Europe

41. Using RRF resources to kick-start a job-rich recovery in Greece

Author:
Manos Matsaganis and Georgios Manalis
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is a golden opportunity for those member states that were most badly hit first by the debt crisis then by the pandemic. Greece, one of the largest beneficiaries in per capita terms, is due to receive very significant resources that can help arrest the decline of the 2010s. Can these resources be spent wisely and efficiently enough to kickstart the process of inclusive and sustainable growth? This paper briefly reviews the Greek National Recovery and Resilience Plan (Greece 2.0), assessing its potential contribution to upgrading the economy’s growth model, enhancing skills, and boosting employment. In 2007-19, total investment in Greece shrank by a stunning 70% in real terms. Over the same period, public investment fell by 62%, business investment by 44%, and household investment (on housing, mostly) by 89%. Under-investment constrains growth and undermines the future prospects of the Greek economy. The Recovery and Resilience Facility offers Greece a unique opportunity to bridge the investment gap, giving a boost to the sustainable recovery of the Greek economy. Technically, Greece 2.0, the country’s National Recovery and Resilience Plan is competently drafted, as its favourable reception by the European Commission indicates. Still, critical issues abound. In this sense, Greece 2.0 embodies the contradictions of the current juncture. On the one hand, there is a consensus that the Greek economy should rebalance, by pursuing a growth strategy that relies much more on exports than in the recent past, and much less on domestic consumer demand fuelled by debt. On the other hand, the legacy of the past weighs heavily on social and political actors, limiting their room for manoeuvre. The list is daunting. It remains to be seen how the above will play out over the next few years.
Topic:
Debt, Economy, Crisis Management, Resilience, and Economic Recovery
Political Geography:
Europe and Greece

42. Europe’s moment of truth: United by adversity?

Author:
Fabian Zuleeg and Janis Emmanouilidis
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Policy Centre (EPC)
Abstract:
Inaction is not an option for the Union. It must demonstrate both unity and ambition along a concrete reform path, specifically across 10 strategic areas. The EU27 must decide whether the integration project can once again become a success story – this time in reaction to the watershed moment we are experiencing. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a major transgression against, and tragedy for, a sovereign country and its people wanting to determine their own future. There is no justification for this war of aggression and the war crimes that Russian troops have already carried out – all driven by revisionist ideology and the neo-imperial ambitions of President Putin and his supporters.
Topic:
NATO, European Union, Regional Integration, Crisis Management, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe

43. Managing the energy and food crises: Exceptional times call for exceptional measures

Author:
Annika Hedberg
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Policy Centre (EPC)
Abstract:
The Russian war on Ukraine is an unprecedented test for the EU and its leaders. On top of the security, humanitarian and refugee crises, they must manage its impact on our economy and energy and food systems. With prices soaring and supply chains disrupted, they must respond to the cost-of-living crisis. Exceptional times call for exceptional measures, including in how we produce and consume energy and food. This Discussion Paper identifies priorities for action to prevent the energy and food crises from spiralling out of control and to enhance European resilience, sustainability and prosperity.
Topic:
European Union, Crisis Management, Energy Crisis, Food Crisis, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe

44. Keeping a cool head: How to improve the EU migration crisis response

Author:
Helena Hahn
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Policy Centre (EPC)
Abstract:
One of the critical lessons learned from the 2015/16 migration crisis was that the EU’s crisis response suffered from lacking coordination. Instead of seeming prepared, it appeared to be ‘muddling through’, which resulted in ad hoc and reactive measures. Now, six years later, Europe has seen a rapid succession of migration and humanitarian crises in Afghanistan, Belarus, and Ukraine, evoking memories of the challenges the EU and its member states faced in responding to the events of 2015/16. This Discussion Paper explores whether any lessons have been learned in terms of crisis coordination since that time – and if so, which ones. Crucially, it also engages with questions around how much flexibility versus consolidation of crisis structures and processes will be needed to strengthen EU crisis responses in the future. There has been some cause for optimism in the past year. Between successful coordination efforts within the Solidarity Platform, established in response to arrivals from Ukraine, as well as increased international engagement and alliance-building, notably with the United States and Canada, there are several good practices to draw on. Even so, these sorts of flexible and targeted coordination efforts should be complemented with further consolidation. Given that each migration crisis differs from the next, there will never be one single coordinating mechanism or entity. Yet, the EU should consider pooling and streamlining information around (potential) displacement crises at a designated ‘crisis hub’. Importantly, more meaningful and constructive collaboration between the EU, member states, international organizations, partner countries, and affected countries is also needed. For this, the EU should consider replicating or continuing successful coordination mechanisms beyond the crisis moment, such as the Solidarity Platform, while ensuring a more proactive deactivation of purely crisis mechanisms. Internationally, the EU should continue building its engagement around migration and asylum issues. This would serve not only to foster longer-term exchange and crisis learning across boundaries (e.g., transatlantic exchanges on lessons learned and the way forward). It would also strengthen the EU’s global convening power and leadership at a time when migration crises are becoming increasingly complex and overlapping and therefore in need of joint efforts.
Topic:
Migration, European Union, Refugees, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:
Europe

45. Toward a New Transatlantic Approach to Russia Sanctions

Author:
Edward Fishman, Andrea Kendall-Taylor, and Angela Stent
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
This policy brief is a product of the Center for a New American Security Transatlantic Forum on Russia, an initiative designed to spur coordination between the United States and Europe on Russia-related policy across multiple issue areas. The policy briefs are informed by a series of dialogues with leading experts from both sides of the Atlantic. The analysis and recommendations in the memo reflect areas of agreement between U.S. and European experts. Where there are notable differences in perspective, we highlight those to better enable policymakers to navigate fissures that can hinder coordination. We thank all the experts who contributed to such fruitful dialogue, especially Nigel Gould-Davies, Brian O’Toole, and Maria Shagina. Introduction As Russia continues to build its forces on Ukraine’s border, the United States and its allies have laid out the economic costs that Russian President Vladimir Putin would face for any further aggression against Ukraine. The Biden administration has stated it is willing to pursue “economic measures that we've refrained from using in the past.”1 In addition, the United States has indicated it is prepared to use export controls on U.S.-origin technologies that are key to Russia’s industrial sectors and potentially enact a Russia-focused Foreign Direct Product Rule—a tool that, to date, has only been used against Huawei. It is unclear if such a package is enough to deter Putin, especially if he is intent on pursuing his maximalist objectives—autonomy for parts of eastern Ukraine that would give Russia a veto over Ukrainian foreign policy and closing NATO’s door to Ukraine. Nonetheless, implementing such sanctions if Putin further escalates in Ukraine is critical for raising the costs to Putin and for restricting Russia’s ability to sustain its aggressive foreign policy over the long term. Regardless of what happens in Ukraine, however, U.S.-Russia relations are on a new course. The era of working toward a stable and predictable relationship with Russia is over for now. The United States will need a new, more proactive approach—one in which sanctions will be a tool (among many) that Washington should use to deter future Russian attacks on liberal democracies and disrupt Russia’s destabilizing actions, especially the corrupt networks that Moscow uses to spread its influence and sustain its hold on power. This policy brief outlines the current state of play of U.S. and European sanctions policies on Russia and how the United States and Europe can update its sanctions approach in this new era of relations with Russia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Crisis Management, Deterrence, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and United States of America

46. Completing Europe’s banking union: economic requirements and legal conditions

Author:
Thorsten Beck, Jan Pieter Krahnen, Philippe Martin, Franz Mayer, Jean Pisani-Ferry, Tobias Tröger, Beatrice di Mauro, Nicolas Veron, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The European Union’s banking union project started in mid-2012 in response to the euro-area crisis, with the goal of breaking the bank-sovereign vicious circle. The objective was also to restore private liability in banking and to move towards an integrated supranational market for banking services. For all the progress achieved in the past decade, particularly in banking supervision, these aims have not yet been accomplished. This Policy Contribution analyses the deficiencies of the current framework and identifies possible responses, in line with three levels of reform ambition. We label these ‘incremental’ (broadening the scope for private-sector burden-sharing in future cases of bank failures), ‘real’ (effectively breaking the bank-sovereign vicious circle), and ‘cosmic’ (a single, seamlessly integrated banking market). European policymakers should set their sights on the second level, which we view as achievable within the current decade, requiring new EU legislation but no change to the European treaties.
Topic:
Regulation, Economy, Crisis Management, European Central Bank, and Banking
Political Geography:
Europe

47. A grand bargain to steer through the European Union’s energy crisis

Author:
Ben McWilliams, Giovanni Sgaravatti, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Europe’s energy system faces unprecedented physical and institutional stress. The policy response so far has been excessively nationally focussed and could undermine the goals of calming energy markets over the next 18 months and achieving ambitious decarbonisation targets. At the basis of the crisis is a post-COVID-19 global energy imbalance. While demand bounced back quickly as economies re-opened, supply did not. A particular challenge is that the reducing supply of fossil fuels in line with climate targets has not been matched by a commensurate reduction of fossil-fuel demand. Russian manipulation of European natural gas markets since summer 2021, exploiting its significant market power, has deepened the crisis. Finally, events including weak French nuclear output and the ongoing drought, which has cut hydropower generation, have further escalated the situation. In response to high and volatile prices and forced demand reduction, European governments have tended to opt for narrow and uncoordinated measures that prioritise national security of supply and affordability over an integrated European approach. Subsidising energy consumption instead of demand reduction has been a common and misguided approach. Governments run the risk that energy consumption subsidies become unsustainable, eroding trust in energy markets, slowing action in sanctioning Russia and increasing the cost of the net-zero transition. An integrated European approach and a coordinated plan is essential to address the crisis. European Union leaders must strike a grand energy bargain based on four broad principles: (i) all countries bringing forward every available supply-side flexibility, (ii) all countries making comprehensive efforts to reduce demand, (iii) a political committing to maintain energy markets and cross-border flows, (iv) compensation for the most vulnerable consumers. This grand bargain can be the first step on a new course towards united energy policy at EU level.
Topic:
Markets, European Union, Crisis Management, Energy, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe

48. The future of nuclear energy in the Baltic Sea Region

Author:
Izabela Surwillo
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has put the issue of energy supply at the top of the EU’s security agenda, leading to a drastic policy shift in energy relations with Moscow. Similarly to other European states, countries in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR) are struggling to phase out Russian fossil fuels and accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy amid skyrocketing energy prices. Although there are no quick fixes, the challenge of the dual energy and climate crisis in a tense geopolitical context has triggered different policy responses across the region, with national policies increasingly pointing to the nuclear energy sector.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, European Union, Crisis Management, Nuclear Energy, Russia-Ukraine War, and Net Zero
Political Geography:
Europe and Baltic Sea

49. The Cyclical Behaviour of Fiscal Policy During the Covid-19 Crisis

Author:
Philipp Heimberger
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This paper analyses the cyclicality of fiscal policy (discretionary versus automatic) for 28 advanced economies over 1995-2021 by paying special attention to the Covid-19 crisis. We find evidence that discretionary fiscal policy during the Covid-19 crisis (2020-2021) was significantly more countercyclical than before – in particular in the Eurozone. We do not find comparable evidence for more counter-cyclicality during the financial crisis or Euro crisis, which lends support to the argument that discretionary fiscal policy responded especially forceful to stabilise the economy during the Covid-19 crisis. Furthermore, automatic fiscal stabilisers contributed significantly to counter-cyclical stabilisation, although their performance over 2020-2021 was more in line with the past than for discretionary fiscal policy. Overall, fiscal policy in non-Eurozone advanced countries is more countercyclical than in the Eurozone. However, the cyclicality varies markedly across countries. Our findings shed light on how the cyclical behaviour of fiscal policy varies across countries and time.
Topic:
Financial Crisis, Crisis Management, Fiscal Policy, COVID-19, and Euro
Political Geography:
Europe

50. Europe in a perfect storm

Author:
Jean-Dominique Giuliani and Pascale Joannin
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
The European Union continues to encounter greater and more violent [1] crises as well as strategic surprises. The Russian war in Ukraine is the latest one in a series. However, it would seem that there are no more crises, only the acceleration of unforeseen events and profound changes. After the subprime crisis, Greek finances, Syrian refugees, the Covid pandemic, the spectre of war is back on the continent. All of these challenges are putting a strain on most EU policies and yet they confirm the relevance of the European project. In the face of these events, the European Union has made more progress in a few months than in thirty years. But it is paying for its delays and hesitations. It must revise many of its policies and resolutely project itself into a new and more brutal global world.
Topic:
European Union, Crisis Management, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe