Search

941. Trading Up: An EU Trade Policy for Better Market Access and Resilient Sourcing

Author:
Fredrik Erixon, Oscar Guinea, Philipp Lamprecht, Oscar du Roy, Elena Sisto, and Renata Zilli
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
Europe’s competitiveness could be substantially improved by a trade policy that facilitates more trade and other forms of cross-border exchange. The evidence is clear: the EU trades less with the rest of the world than would be expected given the size of its economy. With 85 percent of global growth happening outside of the EU – and with an increasing share of all new technologies, innovations, patents, human capital, and R&D expenditure emerging in other parts of the world than Europe – the EU needs to find better ways to integrate with international markets. It is now becoming urgent for the EU to revive its international trade policy. Europe’s increasing detachment from global markets lead to two major economic concerns: deteriorating market access and less capability to build economic resilience. Market access can be defined as an export challenge, as EU firms face increasing trade barriers that hinder their ability to sell products and services abroad. These barriers ultimately limit the EU’s ability to scale up production, specialise, and increase R&D spending. Economic resilience is an import challenge. To become more resilient, the EU must diversify its sources of supply, particularly for critical raw materials, and secure a stable and frictionless access to foreign high-end goods, services, and technologies. The next five years present a critical opportunity for the EU to address the challenges limiting the contribution of international trade to EU’s competitiveness. This Policy Brief outlines seven trade policy recommendations that tackle the lack of market access and address the need for economic resilience. These policy recommendations are there for the EU to take: they are realistic and achievable. The EU has the power to make these seven policy recommendations a reality.
Topic:
Markets, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Trade, and Resilience
Political Geography:
Europe

942. Keeping Up with the US: Why Europe’s Productivity Is Falling Behind

Author:
Fredrik Erixon, Oscar Guinea, and Oscar du Roy
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
The European Union stands at a crossroads. For decades, the EU’s productivity growth has consistently lagged the United States, leading to slower growth in living standards and decline in global economic power. While short-term factors like the strong US fiscal expansion have widened the gap in nominal GDP growth in recent years, the fact is that Europe has trailed the US economic development for several decades and the root of the problem lies in deeper structural issues within the European economy. Four major forces fuel this productivity divide. Firstly, the EU’s investment in research and development (R&D) pales in comparison to the U.S., leading to fewer patents and a slower pace of technology-fuelled innovation. Secondly, Europe trails America in the stock and growth of intangible capital investments, which are crucial for adopting and diffusing new technologies that drive productivity. Thirdly, the EU market exhibits slower business creation and destruction compared to the US. This rigidity hinders the flow of resources towards the most productive firms. Lastly, despite boasting higher levels of trade openness, the EU attracts less Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) than the US, curbing its access to cutting-edge global technologies and expertise. To close the gap, European policymakers should implement a comprehensive strategy for faster productivity growth. The first step is turning up the dial on R&D spending, targeting 4-5 percent of GDP by 2040. Next, Europe should prioritise investments in intangible assets and lay down the digital infrastructure that will underpin future growth. Revitalising the single market is also crucial: reducing internal and external market barriers for services, the primary vehicle for trading intangible assets. Moreover, the EU should foster a market environment that encourages entrepreneurship and facilitate the entry and exit of firms so resources cascade towards the most productive sectors. By harnessing the strengths of the single market and implementing these recommendations, European policymakers can propel the EU towards a more competitive and prosperous future.
Topic:
Markets, European Union, Productivity, and Economic Competition
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

943. Trade in the Great Sea: A Brief State of Play of EU-Southern Neighbourhood Trade Relations

Author:
Jan A. Micallef
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
The Mediterranean is a vibrant economic geography that could grow significantly. This paper reviews the trade relations between the EU and Southern Neighbourhood Countries (SNCs) – their history and the current status of the bilateral trade agreements. While these agreements have many similarities, there are also some differences in scale and scope. The paper also looks at the development of trade between the EU and SNCs and concludes that developments have generally been positive.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Trade
Political Geography:
Europe and Mediterranean

944. The EU’s Trillion Dollar Gap in ICT and Cloud Computing Capacities: The Case for a New Approach to Cloud Policy

Author:
Matthias Bauer, Fredrik Erixon, and Dyuti Pandya
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
An inward-looking EU approach to cloud computing and data policies risks stifling innovation and competitiveness by promoting domestic champions at the expense of accessing global cloud capabilities. Limiting market diversity and access to best-in-breed solutions could hinder digital transformation across sectors, raising costs and constraining growth opportunities. By contrast, a free trade approach to cloud offer guardrails and security but champions non-discriminatory cross-border and regulatory policies, yielding economic advantages by stimulating investments, fostering innovation, and enhancing competition. Unfortunately, some EU policymakers envision Europe building an independent ICT infrastructure, exemplified by initiatives like the European Alliance on Industrial Data, Edge and Cloud. This approach prioritises technological sovereignty, aiming not just to maintain European control over critical infrastructure and data but favouring localisation policies, including in AI and quantum computing. However, the approach is simply not going to work because the amount of resources that are needed for “pure-EU firms” to rise up as significant competitors to global leaders is so large that it would drain other sectors of investments and human capital. The investment gap between the EU and the US in ICT and cloud-related sectors, totalling some USD 1.36 trillion, presents a significant challenge for native European companies. To catch up by 2030, 2040, and 2050, European technology companies would need to substantially increase annual investments, ranging from approximately USD 157 billion to USD 1.2 trillion annually, representing 0.8 percent to 6.4 percent of the EU’s GDP. This would – hypothetically – require a significant commitment of resources. Despite recent efforts such as state aid for R&D in cloud and edge computing, the scale of investment needed far exceeds the current levels, underscoring the urgency for an open and non-discriminatory EU policy approach to bolster Europe’s position in the rapidly growing and technologically changing digital landscape. There are different components to a successful cloud policy, including policies to spur adoption and cross-border cloud integration in the EU, and more investment in R&D. EU policymakers should adopt a dynamic perspective rather than fixating on static market shares, and pursue policies that prioritise innovation and technological advancement over merely seeking to catch up on current technologies. The cloud market and the broader Internet market are going through rapid changes, leading to new services and new competition. A future-oriented approach to cloud policy advocates for policies that foster competition, drive technological progress, and enable interoperability, all of which align with the dynamic nature of cloud services and global markets.
Topic:
Communications, European Union, Digital Economy, Cloud Computing, and Information Technology
Political Geography:
Europe

945. Reinventing Europe’s Single Market: A Way Forward to Align Ideals and Action

Author:
Matthias Bauer, Dyuti Pandya, Vanika Sharma, and Elena Sisto
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
It is essential for EU institutions and Member State governments to shift their focus from the abstract concept of the “Single Market” to the concrete objective of “legal harmonisation in the EU.” This transition represents a strategic realignment towards more pragmatic policymaking. Adopting a 28th regime to address national regulation discrepancies would align with this goal and enhance the Single Market’s effectiveness in promoting economic growth and competitiveness. Given the EU’s ongoing loss of relative global economic clout, it is crucial to establish an ambitious timeline for implementing the most critical Single Market reforms. The Letta Report serves as a wake-up call to revitalise the EU’s Single Market, emphasising the need for decisive action. Its vision largely hinges on legal harmonisation within Europe, building on early efforts to liberalise markets and establish a truly integrated European market. Despite efforts, “integration fatigue” remains a significant challenge due to legal fragmentation across European economies. Previous reports, from the Cecchini Report in 1992 to the Europe 2020 Strategy, have highlighted persistent issues like regulatory divergences and declining political support for market integration. Despite numerous proposals, progress has been limited, and many challenges persist or have worsened (see Section 2). An analysis of EU reports reveals a shift in policy priorities over time. Initially, there was a strong focus on liberalisation and market opening, with less attention given to state aid and industrial policymaking. The Letta Report highlights the importance of regulatory convergence and harmonisation, reflecting a deeper understanding and recognition of the drivers of EU competitiveness. The rise of nationalism and a shift towards “Strategic Autonomy” within the EU have hindered crucial market reforms. This highlights the importance of aligning laws across Member States to strengthen and reinforce EU’s economic resilience and international competitiveness (see Section 3). EU institutions and Member State governments should set specific goals for “legal harmonisation in the EU.” This shift would address real challenges faced by businesses and citizens, and build political will for necessary reforms. Prioritising legal harmonisation would enhance internal cohesion and align national laws with Union-wide goals. An actionable roadmap – potentially with a 2028 deadline – is crucial to address the substantial gap between ambitious EU strategies and Europe’s economic realities. (see Section 4). Implementing sector-specific and horizontal policies in a new regulatory regime would improve cross-border operations and competitiveness. The Letta Report advocates for a European Code of Business Law to establish a unified regulatory framework, introducing a 28th legal regime to address national regulation discrepancies. Extending this regime to include tax and labour market policies would significantly enhance cross-border operations. The EU and Member State governments can eliminate substantial internal barriers by prioritising key horizontal policies affecting all businesses, such as fragmented tax laws, labour market policies, and social security systems. Simplifying and harmonising these policies on the basis of the facilitation of four freedoms is crucial for unlocking the Single Market’s potential for businesses and workers, boosting the EU’s global competitiveness. Allowing coalitions of willing countries to advance in certain areas of legal integration provides a viable solution to the long-standing Single Market “fatigue”. By enabling smaller groups of Member States to pursue integration in specific areas, the EU can bypass the constraints imposed by rigid voting requirements and achieve greater agility, accountability, and acceptance in EU law-making. This approach not only fosters flexibility but also upholds the fundamental principles and objectives of the EU. To ensure the integrity of the EU legal order and prevent unjustified barriers or discrimination against non-participating members, it is essential to establish safeguards and oversight mechanisms. These measures would maintain cohesion within the Union while allowing for progressive legal integration among willing Member States.
Topic:
Markets, European Union, Digital Economy, and Economic Integration
Political Geography:
Europe

946. Russia’s Influence and Disinformation Campaign in Armenia

Author:
David A. Grigorian
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
Often-overlooked developments in Armenia show how Western policy makers are failing to recognize and counteract the growing sophistication of Russia’s propaganda machine. There is much the West can do. Intelligence authorities can start sharing more information about Russia’s influence operations. We need media that can report with more knowledge from the region. Working more closely with the pro-Western opposition, Brussels and Washington, D.C. can help shape an agenda that is not just offering better conditions for Armenia but also leads to more credibility in a Western-oriented agenda. Finally, it is important for the West to acknowledge their own blunders over the settlements between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which led to continued ethnic cleansing.
Topic:
Propaganda, Disinformation, and Foreign Influence
Political Geography:
Russia and Armenia

947. Strategies for Assessing Triple Nexus Initiatives and Integrating Peace Aspects – Insights from Niger

Author:
Christina Plesner Volkdal
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for Business and Development Studies (CBDS), Copenhagen Business School
Abstract:
The Triple Nexus approach represents a paradigm shift in how international organizations, including UNICEF, address complex crises that span humanitarian, development, and peace dimensions. UNICEF must navigate the delicate balance between adhering to the humanitarian principles of neutrality, impartiality, independence, and humanity while engaging in development and peace-building activities that may require aligning with government policies and engaging in politically sensitive contexts. There is a significant challenge in developing metrics and methodologies to measure the synergies and outcomes of the Triple Nexus approach effectively. This includes quantifying how initiatives contribute to peace interacting with humanitarian and development outcomes. UNICEF's approach in Niger, implementing food security policies to respond to humanitarian needs while simultaneously operating as a development program, holds the potential to positively impact peace in the region, thus aligning with the Triple Nexus framework.
Topic:
Development, International Organization, Food Security, Crisis Management, and UNICEF
Political Geography:
Africa and Niger

948. Introduction: Marxifying IR, IRifying Marxism

Author:
Faruk Yalvaç and Jonathan Joseph
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Although the neglect of Marxism has been a pervasive characteristic of IR theory, there has been a marked revival of interest in Marxism. Marx’s materialist insights into the general historical development of societies, as well as his critique of capitalism and political economy, have served as alternative starting points for different critical approaches to IR and offers a welcome alternative to neorealism, constructivism, and poststructuralism that have dominated IR for several decades. Marxism provides a redefinition of IR by focusing on changes in material circumstances, historical conditions, and society instead of assuming unchanging and fixed structures of anarchy or the state. Marx’s analysis and insights into the dynamics of international relations have become even more important given the ongoing crisis of neoliberal capitalism, the rise of authoritarianism, right-wing nationalist populisms, and the racial and gendered subordinations accompanying them pointing to the importance of Marxifying IR and IRifying Marxism.
Topic:
International Relations, Development, Socialism/Marxism, Critical Realism, Ecofeminism, Political Marxism, and Gramscianism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

949. Quo Vadis, Historical International Relations? Geopolitical Marxism and the Promise of Radical Historicism

Author:
Lauri Von Pfaler and Benno Teschke
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
John Maclean’s 1988 call “Marxism and IR: A Strange Case of Mutual Neglect” has generated a rich bounty of Marxist studies and paradigms in International Relations (IR). This cross-pollination merged in the 1990s with the “historical turn” and shaped the sub-fields of International Historical Sociology and International Political Economy. But has it left its mark on how IR is practised today? We argue that while Marxism has spoken significantly to the discipline, mainstream IR, even Historical IR, has been largely impervious to Marxist arguments, drawing the standard charge of economism and structuralism. Rectifying these critiques, we suggest that conventional historical studies of “the international” remain methodologically and substantively impoverished. We exemplify this by showing how leading Historical IR studies of “systems change” fail to explain the inside/outside and public/private differentiations constitutive of the modern international order and to integrate the “levels of analysis” they presuppose. We further argue that this rejection has been facilitated by influential Marxist IR paradigms, which ultimately privilege structuralism over historicism: While Neo-Gramscians initially mobilised “historicism” to dissolve claims about the “sameness” of international relations across time and space, the approach became identified with the reified master-category of “hegemony”. Uneven and Combined Development, in turn, has gravitated towards matching Neo-realism’s claim to theoretical universality by insisting on transhistorical model-building and nomological “grand theory”. Both approaches remain over-sociologised and fail to address international politics. Drawing on radically historicist Political Marxism, this article shows how its substantive socio-political premises explain the historical formation of the contemporary international order and re-unite the “levels of analysis” theoretically to provide a framework for non-reductionist and non-economistic accounts of historical international relations. This requires an answer to the agentic challenge of Neo-Classical Realism by reincorporating grand strategy, diplomacy, and international politics into a reformulated perspective of Geopolitical Marxism to track the full historicity of the making of international orders.
Topic:
International Relations, History, Socialism/Marxism, Sociology, Methods, Agency, Geopolicy, and Historicity
Political Geography:
Global Focus

950. The Long Shadow of Structural Marxism in International Relations: Historicising Colonial Strategies in the Americas

Author:
Samuel Parris and Armando Van Rankin
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Over the past decades, Marxist-inspired approaches from the field of International Historical Sociology (IHS) have theorised the relationship between 16th and 17th Century European colonial expansion and the development of relations of production and economic growth on both sides of the Atlantic. In this article, we argue that such attempts – from Dependency Theory (DT), World-Systems Theory (WST), and Uneven and Combined Development (UCD) – are premised on a structuralist perspective which overextend the notion of capitalism and under examine the sphere of production, rendering divergent and distinct strategies of European colonialism a homogenous and under-historicised process. Embracing theoretical innovations from Geopolitical Marxism (GPM), we dispute this unitary logic of expansion, instead applying a radical historicist methodology to demonstrate that British and Spanish colonial strategies in the Americas (intra-imperial free trade vs. mercantilism) were shaped by nationally specific class relations (capitalism vs. feudalism/absolutism), generating unique patterns of settlement on the ground (mineral extraction vs. cash-crop production). Promoting historicism thus allows Marxist International Relations to better recognise "the 'making of' the international order" during the period of European colonial expansion from the 16th century onwards, and, in doing so, further understand its enduring legacies.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Political Economy, Socialism/Marxism, Colonialism, International Historical Sociology, and Radical Historicism
Political Geography:
South America, Central America, and North America