Search

Begin New Search Topic European Union Publication Year within 5 Years

121. The implications of the European Union’s new fiscal rules

Author:
Zsolt Darvas, Lennard Welslau, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
European Union countries are required by the EU Treaty to keep their budget deficits within 3 percent of GDP, and their public debt within 60 percent of GDP. A new framework to enforce these rules is based on country-specific debt sustainability analyses (DSA) and uses a single indicator, a measure of public expenditure, as the annual fiscal policy target. These changes are welcome. To assess the sustainability of public finances, it is much better to focus on the likely evolution of the debt path than to rely on simple numerical rules. Public expenditures net of changes to tax policy are a far better target for fiscal policy than the deficit, since they are under the control of the government and cannot give rise to pro-cyclical fiscal policy (excess spending in good times, fiscal cuts in bad times). These features could increase the framework’s efficiency and improve compliance. However, the new framework also contains numerical safeguards to ensure a minimum pace of debt and deficit reduction. These might overwrite the DSA-based requirements and could undermine the rationale for the new rules and the incentives for compliance. The safeguards could also introduce some pro-cyclicality and, more importantly, could hold back increases in public investment. Our calculations show that the new framework will require ambitious fiscal adjustments from high-debt countries, though less than would have been required by the previous framework. Numerical safeguards will not be a significant constraint in the first application of the framework in 2024, except in the case of Finland. In the next application, in 2028, they imply for France and Italy greater fiscal adjustment than required by the DSA and the 3 percent benchmark. There is ambiguity about the consistency of the new fiscal rules and the largely-unchanged excessive deficit procedure (EDP), and whether proposed reforms and investment will influence the DSA. This could interfere with the successful application of the framework. We recommend that the EDP should require the same adjustment as the DSA, a method- ology should be developed to estimate the quantitative impact of proposed investments and reforms, and the DSA methodology should be revised. In case EU countries’ investment plans on aggregate do not fill the green public-investment gap, we recommend a new EU facility to foster such investments.
Topic:
Budget, European Union, Investment, and Fiscal Policy
Political Geography:
Europe

122. How much does Europe pay for clean air?

Author:
Miquel Oliu-Barton and Juan Mejino Lopez
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Despite significant progress, air pollution still causes €600 billion in losses each year in the European Union – equal to 4 percent of its annual GDP. These costs stem from productivity losses such as increased absenteeism, the reduction of in-job productivity and harm to ecosystems. Air pollution costs are disproportionately high in eastern Europe and Italy, where losses are projected to remain above 6 percent of GDP until 2030. The EU’s 10 percent most-polluted regions suffer 25 percent of the burden of mortality attributable to air pollution. Measures against air pollution should be prioritised, not delayed, in these regions. Promoting clean air boosts economic growth by €50 billion to €60 billion every year. The EU’s increasing commitment to cleaner air is reflected by a threefold increase in the funds allocated to promoting clean-air policies, from €7 billion annually for the period 2014-2020 to €25 billion annually for 2021-2027, notably supported by the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF). EU financial support must continue beyond 2026 when the RRF terminates. The EU Ambient Air Quality Directive sends a strong signal but leaves loopholes: exceptions and postponements may jeopardise overall progress on cleaner air. Fossil-fuel consumption is one of the main obstacles to achieving clean-air targets. Yet fossil fuels subsidies were fourteen times higher than EU clean-air funds between 2014 and 2020, and are projected to remain five times higher for the years ahead. Ammonia, an important precursor of fine particulate matter mainly stemming from agriculture, is insufficiently regulated. Effectiveness of clean-air policies is context-dependent. Identifying concrete actions for each region and quantifying the potential gains are required to accelerate the transition to cleaner air. Phasing out coal use in residential heating is most profitable in eastern Europe, while reducing industrial and agricultural emissions would reap more benefits in the north of Italy.
Topic:
European Union, Economic Growth, Productivity, and Air Pollution
Political Geography:
Europe

123. A conceptual framework for the identification and governance of European public goods

Author:
Gregory Claeys and Armin Steinbach
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The challenging current policy environment has raised the question of which policy decisions should be taken at national level and which at European Union level. As a general rule, the EU should be responsible only for the provision of European public goods (EPGs), while countries are better placed to provide national public goods. However, in practice, the situation is rarely that simple. We offer a framework for identification of EPGs with three main insights. First, a decision to provide a public good at national level, EU level or a combination of both depends on the degree of heterogeneity of preferences across countries and the efficiency case for EU-level provision. When preferences vary and the efficiency case is weak, goods should be provided at national level. When preferences are similar and the efficiency case is strong, goods should be provided at the EU level. When preferences differ but there is a strong efficiency case, a trade-off arises. Second, institutional and legal instruments exist already to manage this trade-off. These include: competence transfers, decision-making modalities, variable participation of countries, centralisation of delivery and funding, and compensating negatively affected countries to achieve greater alignment of preferences. Third, both the efficiency case for EPGs and the distribution of preferences over their provision may change over time. This could be because the world around the EU changes (for example, giving greater weight to an efficiency case, eg in areas related to defence) or because preferences change, for example, as result of a pandemic, or because a particular institutional or compensation practice convinces dissenters that they can be better off inside than outside a multi-country arrangement governing the provision of a public good. An implication is that the question ‘should public goods be provided at the national or European level?’ may be the wrong question to ask. The right question is how to find institutional arrangements for public-good provision, to maximise the benefits of public goods for EU members.
Topic:
Governance, European Union, Institutions, and Public Goods
Political Geography:
Europe

124. Instruments of economic security

Author:
Conor McCaffrey and Niclas Poitiers
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Geopolitical and economic developments, including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and trade disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic, have raised concerns about the European Union’s exposure to hostile countries. The challenge of improving European economic security (which we narrowly treat here as exposure to foreign trade or production shocks) has grown in importance, with various relevant policy measures introduced at EU level. Focusing in particular on the threat posed by economic coercion, this paper begins by assessing the nature of this threat, before outlining two lessons that can be drawn from two recent instances of this coercion in action: China’s actions against Lithuania and Australia respectively. First, while much of the policy debate has focused on imports, the threat to EU exporters should not be ignored. Second, while coercion may not cause any macroeconomically significant harm, this may mask severe impacts on the targeted industries, which should be considered in any policy responses. The EU has significantly added to its policy tools in this area, though some of the instruments introduced under the umbrella of economic security go beyond the definition we consider. An effective response should be built around: building a deeper understanding of the risks facing the EU; improving diversification of both exports and imports; using targeted industrial policy in the limited sectors where the risks warrant intervention; and managing and limiting the fallout of any shocks using ex-post instruments.
Topic:
European Union, Economic Policy, Economic Security, and Coercion
Political Geography:
Europe

125. Three risks that must be addressed for new European Union fiscal rules to succeed

Author:
Lucio Pench
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The debate on the reform of the European Union’s fiscal rules, the Stability and Growth Pact, has largely focused on their design. This nearly exclusive focus has distracted attention from the equally, if not more, important aspects of implementation. The reform, completed in April 2024, left implementation unaddressed, or at least open to very different potential outcomes. In particular, the reform failed to clarify the interplay between EU countries’ medium-term fiscal structural plans (MTFSPs), which embody the new focus on debt sustainability, and the excessive deficit procedure (EDP), which remains the main enforcement tool under the rules. The need for clarification is urgent as several countries are set to enter EDPs for breaching the SGP’s 3 percent of GDP deficit threshold at the same time as their first MTFSPs are endorsed in autumn 2024. There is a risk that the adjustment paths prescribed by EDPs may be at least temporarily less demanding than the debt-sustainability requirements of the MTFSPs would normally imply. Even if consistency between EDPs and MTFSPs is ensured from the start, inconsistencies may arise over time and be resolved in a way that further postpones the necessary adjustment. The main risk is that the 3 percent of GDP deficit might be perceived as the only target that matters for countries that enter EDPs in 2024, as repeated revisions of the MTFSPs undermine the cogency of the debt sustainability requirements. This scenario is likely to materialise if the countries are allowed to exit their EDPs upon bringing their deficits to or below 3 percent of GDP, while being still far from the necessary correction of the debt trajectory. It is important to shape countries’ expectations on the implementation of the upcoming EDPs in a way that is conducive to the immediate internalisation of the debt sustainability constraint implied by the new rules, rather than allowing it to be viewed as a distant objective. This change in expectations could be achieved by clarifying that, even if a country has been placed in an EDP only for breach of the deficit criterion, it should also satisfy the debt criterion for the procedure to be abrogated.
Topic:
Debt, Reform, European Union, Fiscal Policy, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Europe

126. Unpacking China’s industrial policy and its implications for Europe

Author:
Alicia Garcia-Herrero and Robin Schindowski
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
China is often credited with a successful application of industrial policy. One important particularity of China’s industrial policy is that it aims at levelling the playing field between the state economy and the private economy in access to finance, yet within a framework of strategic goals. This aim is not relevant for market economies, such as those of the European Union, but only for those where state enterprises are clearly privileged. Notwithstanding the difficulties in making valid comparisons, our analysis of how China conducts industrial policy in a variety of sectors points to success in some sectors but not all. More importantly, productivity growth in China has already been declining for two decades. Given the very large resources that China has put into industrial policy, with subsidies being only one part, it is surprising that success is not more evident. This relates partly to factors including cronyism and regional protectionism. While the former might be less relevant for the EU given the different institutional background, the latter certainly is relevant since the EU faces the potential consequences of member country-level industrial policy for its single market. A lesson from China seems to come from the sectoral focus, with a long-term and economic-security mindset. The EU is far from this, but it is in the process of linking economic security to industrial policy. Finally, responding to China’s industrial policy involves diverse investigations and challenges in measuring subsidies accurately. Understanding China’s very diverse and complex approach to helping companies achieve the government’s industrial policy goals is crucial for anticipating the consequences of China’s actions. These could be positive, such as cheaper imports of green technology, or negative, such as Chinese overcapacity spilling over to the EU single market.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Markets, European Union, and Economy
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and Asia

127. How to de-risk: European economic security in a world of interdependence

Author:
Jean Pisani-Ferry, Beatrice Weder di Mauro, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Pandemic-related supply disruptions, the energy crisis provoked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and economic coercion by China have put economic security high on the European Union policy agenda. The question is how exactly the EU should ‘de-risk’ its external economic relationships without foregoing the benefits of trade. The standard answer is that it should identify product-level trade dependencies, mainly on the import side, and reduce them, mainly through diversification of suppliers, while otherwise maintaining maximum trade integration. This Policy Brief argues that this answer falls short. First, product-level dependencies cannot be identified reliably even with sophisticated analysis and data. As a result, both ‘missed dependencies’ and ‘false positives’ are inevitable. Second, external shocks and coercion could be propagated through exports, productive assets held abroad and financial channels as much as through imports. The analysis has five main implications Import de-risking should focus on a few product categories for which the costs of supply interruptions would be unquestionably large. This reduces false positives. De-risking and/or buffers to deal with exports and financial coercion require more attention. De-risking must be complemented by raising resilience against all shocks, whatever theirorigin. This requires a deeper and broader European single market. De-risking and resilience must be complemented by deterrence. A sufficiently high probability of chronic trade conflict – or one very large conflict – may justify reducing overall integration with a large trading partner, on both the export andimport sides. EU economic security policies have been right to emphasise the reduction of import dependence on chips and critical raw materials, and the creation of a powerful legal instrument to deter coercion (the Anti-Coercion Instrument). In most other respects, there is room for improvement.
Topic:
European Union, Risk, Trade, Imports, Economic Security, and Interdependence
Political Geography:
China and Europe

128. Using the financial system to enforce export controls

Author:
Benjamin Hilgenstock, Elina Ribakova, Guntram Wolff, and Anna Vlasyuk
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Russian imports of battlefield goods that are subject to export controls, including from Western producers, have surged since mid-2022 and reached levels close to those prior to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Russia thus continues to be able to acquire critical foreign components that it needs for its military industry. These imports occur via mainland China, Hong Kong, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, while other countries including Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz Republic have also seen massive increases in imports from the EU and other coalition countries that likely end up in Russia. The implementation and enforcement of export controls faces major challenges, which are multifaceted and centre around complex supply chains, lack of transparency in documentation and opaque financial structures. The issues are familiar from anti money laundering (AML) and countering financing of terrorism (CFT) frameworks, where much progress has been made in the last two decades. A similar approach could help in rendering export controls effective. We propose: First, financial institutions could be tasked to play a role in the monitoring of the trade in export-controlled goods and the blocking of illicit transactions, building on their experience with due diligence in financial transactions. Second, non-financial companies could learn from banks’ efforts in the AML/CFT sphere to implement proper due-diligence procedures and to ensure export controls compliance. Public-sector investigations and appropriate fines are critical to increase the incentives for firms to act. Technology sanctions are going to be part of the economic statecraft toolbox for the foreseeable future. The Russia case will test their effectiveness and credibility, or lack thereof.
Topic:
Sanctions, European Union, Exports, Trade, Imports, Financial Systems, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

129. Economic arguments in favour of reducing copyright protection for generative AI inputs and outputs

Author:
Bertin Martens
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) models have stirred considerable controversy about copyright protection for AI training inputs and model outputs. The European Union’s AI Act will require model developers to be transparent about their use of training inputs such as text, images and music. The EU Copyright Directive allows free text and data mining of these media inputs unless copyright holders have opted out and want license payments. The right to opt-out amounts to economically inefficient overprotection of copyright. Free use of media content for GenAI training does not affect media sales to consumers. Optouts only strengthen the bargaining position of copyright holders, who decide depending on their private interests. That generates windfall profits without any increase in consumer surplus or social welfare. The licensing of training inputs reduces the quantity of data and the quality of GenAI models, creates transaction costs and reduces competition between GenAI firms. This slows down GenAI-induced innovation in media products and production processes, and productivity gains in all service sectors that apply GenAI. Ultimately, it slows down economic growth compared to what it could be with competitive and high-quality GenAI. Bargaining over license pricing is arbitrary as there is no objective revenue benchmark to start from. Defenders of the moral right to remuneration argue that any arbitrary remuneration is better than no remuneration. But this private moral right comes at the expense of social welfare. The ongoing bargaining and court cases between media producers and GenAI developers risk entrenching this market failure in jurisprudence. Early regulatory intervention and elimination of opt-outs for GenAI training, or weakening them in AI Act implementation guidelines, would solve this. There is no need for copyright on GenAI outputs either. GenAI reduces the marginal cost of machine-production of media outputs to close to zero, on par with the marginal cost of reproduction. That eliminates incentives for piracy. Moreover, composite human-machine outputs benefit from a de-facto extension of copyright on the human component.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Intellectual Property/Copyright, European Union, Regulation, Economic Growth, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Europe

130. The rocky road to EU accession for Western Balkan countries: obstacles and lessons from the Eastern Partnership

Author:
Armin Steinbach
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The Western Balkan countries and the countries of the Eastern Partnership are moving towards European Union accession at different speeds. We explore whether and how the variable speed towards EU accession can be traced to different legal regimes governing European integration: Stabilisation and Association Agreements (SAA) for the Western Balkan countries, and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTA) for the countries of the Eastern Partnership (EaP). We find that DCFTAs apply more lenient conditionality to intra-regional cooperation. They subject non-tariff barriers to a more explicit regime than the Western Balkan SAAs. The DCFTAs also offer a more rigid and comprehensive approach to the approximation of laws than the SAAs, and the DCFTAs are more inclusive with regard to the role of civil society. However, there is no indication that the differences in legal governance have translated into stronger economic performance in the EaP countries or greater integration with the EU, compared to the Western Balkans. The Western Balkan countries remain significantly more integrated than the EaP countries with the EU in trade terms, while convergence with the EU has been stagnating both for the Western Balkan and the EaP countries. Economic shortcomings in the Western Balkan still need to be addressed. Conditionality attached to both integration into the EU single market and EU funding should be nuanced; the eradication of non-tariff barriers should be prioritised both inter-regionally and intra-regionally between Western Balkan countries; the need for stronger EU investment in the region is reinforced by geopolitical concerns about Chinese investments coming without EU-type conditionality attached; and governance should give a stronger role to civil society. In order to address the shortcomings in SAAs, a pragmatic solution is to use the existing governance framework under the SAAs.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Economy, Regional Integration, and Eastern Partnership
Political Geography:
Europe and Balkans