Search

Begin New Search Topic Investment Publication Year within 1 Year

41. Even in authoritarian countries, democracy advocates are worth investing in

Author:
Fernanda Buril, Nate Grubman, and Patrick Quirk
Publication Date:
12-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Freedom and democracy are in decline globally, according to the Atlantic Council’s Freedom Index. Political freedom in particular has slumped sharply since 2019, bringing the world to a twenty-four-year low. The biggest backsliders—the places with the sharpest declines in political freedom—span every major geographic region and many are particularly relevant to US national security. There are several fundamental reasons for the United States to support strategies that aim to halt such backsliding and foster democratization, including ones that go beyond the moral obligation to support humanitarian values. For instance, research shows that democracies are less prone to enable and export transnational crime or terrorism, and democracies are better at adapting to adverse economic events and avoiding large-scale disasters, and are more reliable trading partners, offering better business opportunities by upholding the rule of law and protecting investments from the arbitrary predation of political elites. Most notably, the vast majority of people around the world continue to prefer to be governed democratically. Democracy support also strengthens the US position more broadly in the strategic contest against the autocratic rivals of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Robust democratic institutions—transparent judiciaries, capable legislatures, responsive political parties, an active civil society, and a free press—make it harder for the rulers in the autocratic bloc to co-opt elites in other countries and advance their malign agendas. But with the world experiencing a global democratic recession, questions arise as to whether supporting democracy is a losing battle. Despite the bleak recent data on global democratic progress, democracy assistance is still crucial, not only in countries undergoing political openings and democratic consolidation but also—and perhaps even more so—in countries that are backsliding. Case studies in the Middle East, Latin America, Eastern Europe, and sub-Saharan Africa suggest that using foreign assistance (in addition to and in concert with diplomacy and investment) to support democracy champions wherever they are is an effective strategy, even if the payoff is not immediately apparent at the level of a country’s political system.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Elections, Democracy, Investment, and Democratic Transitions
Political Geography:
Caucasus, Latin America, Lebanon, and Sahel

42. A Strategy for a Competitive Europe: Boosting R&D, Unleashing Investment, and Reducing Regulatory Burdens

Author:
Andrea Dugo and Fredrik Erixon
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
The EU stands at a crucial economic juncture. Economic growth in Europe’s mature economies has stagnated, with productivity and other indicators of economic vitality showing poor results. Public debt is alarmingly high in several countries, and the region faces new fiscal demands due to an ageing population, conflicts and war, and the energy transition. To reverse its economic decline, Europe must adopt a new strategy for improved competitiveness. The starting point of this strategy should be an honest assessment of Europe’s declining productivity compared to leading economies like the US. Historically, some European countries matched or even surpassed US productivity levels, but this gap has widened over the past three decades. While the US economy has also faced challenges, its technology, R&D, and innovation sectors have significantly boosted productivity growth. This paper identifies three key areas for policy improvement to rejuvenate Europe’s economic dynamism: Radical expansion of R&D Expenditure: Governments must significantly increase funding for universities and create better conditions for private R&D investments. The EU currently fails to meet its own target of R&D expenditures at 3 per cent of GDP. Achieving parity with US R&D expenditure levels would require an additional €200 billion annually. Mobilisation of European Savings for Investment: Despite a higher savings rate than the US, Europe’s underdeveloped capital markets hinder economic growth and investment in new enterprises. The EU needs policies to channel savings into a vibrant corporate market. Expanding the European bond market, which is currently half the size of the US one, is essential for European firms to secure funding and keep the pace of American innovation. Regulatory Reform: The EU’s restrictive regulatory environment increases business costs and stifles innovation. A shift in regulatory attitudes, for instance in the banking sector, could unlock €4.5 trillion annually, providing much-needed capital for European firms, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, to finance innovation during the green and digital transition. By addressing these areas, Europe can create a more favourable environment for business growth, innovation, and long-term economic stability.
Topic:
European Union, Regulation, Digital Economy, Investment, and Research and Development
Political Geography:
Europe

43. Future-proofing the EU’s Investment Attractiveness: A Bold Reform Agenda for Competition Enforcement, Taxation and Digital Policy

Author:
Matthias Bauer, Dyuti Pandya, and Oscar du Roy
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
Reducing the deterrent effects from EU and Member State laws in three key cross-sector policy areas – competition policy, business taxes and VAT, and digital policies – could significantly enhance the business environment within the Single Market and boost the EU’s attractiveness to both domestic and foreign investors. The EU’s future competitiveness is at risk due to a significant disparity in investments, particularly in technological innovation, compared to the US. Despite having a larger population and labour force, the EU lags behind in large business activities, with US firms consistently outspending their European counterparts in key tech-intensive sectors such as software, computer services, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology. Moreover, China and other emerging nations are rapidly catching up, dramatically diminishing the EU’s relative economic and political influence on the global stage. The urgency for the EU to bridge these gaps is more critical than ever (Section 2). The EU’s profound investment gap highlights a systemic advantage for the US in fostering innovation and economic growth. The EU’s regulatory complexity, largely driven by legal fragmentation in horizontal policies, further exacerbate the situation, deterring cross-border activities reducing the region’s attractiveness to global investors (Section 3).
Topic:
Markets, Reform, European Union, Digital Economy, Investment, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
Europe

44. Carbon Inequality Kills: Why curbing the excessive emissions of an elite few can create a sustainable planet for all

Author:
Mira Alestig, Dabi Nafkote, Abha Jeurkar, Alex Maitland, Max Lawson, Daniel Horen Greenford, Corey Lesk, and Ashfaq Khalfan
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
The only way to beat climate breakdown and deliver social justice is to radically reduce inequality. This briefing paper reveals the catastrophic climate impacts of the richest individuals in the world, and proposes taking urgent action to protect people and the planet. What little carbon dioxide we can still safely emit is being burned indiscriminately by the super-rich. We share new evidence of how the yachts, jets and polluting investments of the 50 richest billionaires are accelerating the climate crisis. Oxfam’s research shows that the emissions of the world’s super-rich 1% are causing economic losses of trillions of dollars; contributing to huge crop losses; and leading to millions of excess deaths. As global temperatures continue to rise, risking the lives and livelihoods of people living in poverty and precarity, we must act now to curb the emissions of the super-rich and make rich polluters pay.
Topic:
Climate Finance, Investment, Loss and Damage (L&D), Conference of the Parties (COP), and Billionaires
Political Geography:
Global Focus

45. Managing Investments in Urban Areas: The Case of Azerbaijani Cities

Author:
Shahnaz Badalova
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
Urban areas in Azerbaijan are experiencing rapid growth and development, fueled by a combination of natural resource wealth, strategic geographic location, and economic reforms. In cities such as Baku, Ganja, and Sumgayit, significant investments have been made in infrastructure, housing construction, and industry. However, effectively managing these investments to achieve sustainable urban development remains a critical challenge. This article examines the policies and strategies for investment management in Azerbaijani cities, learning from both successes and ongoing challenges.
Topic:
Development, Natural Resources, Investment, Urban, and Cities
Political Geography:
Eurasia, Azerbaijan, and South Caucasus

46. An investment strategy to keep the European Green Deal on track

Author:
Jean Pisani-Ferry and Simone Tagliapietra
Publication Date:
12-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Fostering investment in clean energy and transport systems is essential if the European Union is to achieve the 2030 climate goal of a 55 percent emissions reduction relative to 1990. However, getting to the required levels of investment during 2025-2030 is likely to be exceptionally difficult. Clean electricity generation and electricity transmission systems need to be expanded rapidly, while industrial decarbonisation must be boosted and the green transformation of buildings and transport accelerated sharply. But policymakers face growing constraints on the public sector’s ability to support the necessary investments. At EU level, potential obstacles include the end of the NextGenerationEU post-pandemic recovery instrument, the lack of a green carve-out in the reformed EU fiscal framework, the increasingly difficult trade-offs between decarbonisation, competitiveness and security, and the spreading false narratives on climate policy promoted by populist nationalist parties. The latter two challenges are set to be further exacerbated by the return of President Trump in the United States. The upshot is that Europe is not on track to reach its climate targets. It is at a juncture where political resistance to decarbonisation is mounting and where budgetary means to buy off consent are becoming scarce, at both EU level (because the main source of financing is drying up) and national level (because the fiscal rules leave little room for green investment). In this Policy Brief, we assess the investment needed to achieve the 2030 climate goal and climate neutrality by 2050, and discuss why current estimates might be either over- or underestimated. Second, we discuss the roles of the private and public sectors in making these investments happen. Third, we analyse the obstacles to reaching the desired investment levels during 2025-2030, especially for the public sector. Finally we propose measures to overcome or circumvent these obstacles. The business strand consists of innovations destined to ensuring credibility and the full mobilisation of savings. The public strand aims to maximise the firepower of limited fiscal resources.
Topic:
Climate Change, European Union, Investment, Green Deal, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe

47. Catch-up with the US or prosper below the tech frontier? An EU artificial intelligence strategy

Author:
Bertin Martens
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
European Union policymakers want to close the artificial intelligence innovation gap with the United States, as a way to accelerate lagging productivity growth. The EU focus is on expanding an existing supercomputer network with more AI hardware and computing infrastructure, with taxpayer support. However, this computing infrastructure is not adapted to AI modelling. The cost of catching up with leading big tech AI computing centres is already prohibitive for EU budgets, and is set to become even more so. The hardware focus overlooks missing EU markets for complementary services that are required to set up a successful AI business: large-scale business outlets for frontier generative AI models to generate sufficient revenues to cover huge fixed model training costs, hyperscale cloud-computing infrastructure and private equity financing for AI start-ups. In the absence of (or with insufficient) complementary services markets in the EU, start-ups are forced to collaborate with US big tech firms. Injecting taxpayer subsidies to make up for these missing markets may further distort EU markets. Regulatory compliance costs, including uncertainty about the implementation arrangements for the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, add to market problems. The EU should address a wider range of market failures in its policy initiatives. It should strive to increase productivity growth below the AI technology frontier, by facilitating investment and applications of AI-driven services produced by derived and specialised generative AI models, or AI-applications that build on top of existing generative AI models. Building these below-frontier AI applications requires far less computing capacity and less heavy investment costs. Promoting the uptake of AI application services across a wide range of industries can substantially stimulate productivity growth. That requires a razor-sharp focus on pro-innovation guidelines, standards and implementation provisions for the EU AI Act, shortening the Act’s regulatory uncertainty horizon as much as possible, and facilitating collaborations between EU AI startups and big tech companies. Widening and deepening the EU private equity and venture capital market would also be very helpful.
Topic:
Markets, Science and Technology, European Union, Investment, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America